Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, engaged in the business of cloths, silver articles, and jewellery, faced reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO under Section 148 due to significant cash deposits and bank credits. The AO made an addition of Rs. 50,75,402/- under Section 69A concerning unexplained unsecured loans, which the CIT(A) partly sustained.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and, recognizing the importance of evidences, restored the issue of the addition sustained by the CIT(A) under Section 69A back to the Assessing Officer. The AO is directed to adjudicate the matter afresh, granting the assessee a proper opportunity to submit explanations and material evidence.
Key Issues
Whether the addition under Section 69A for unexplained unsecured loans was correctly sustained by the CIT(A) without adequate opportunity for the assessee to provide documentary evidence and explanations.
Sections Cited
Section 147, Section 144B, Section 250, Section 69A, Section 148, Section 143(2), Section 142(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI BENCH
Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI
सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing 17.06.2025 घोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement 18.06.2025 ORDER
PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM:
The appeal is filed by the assesse against the order of the NFAC Delhi/CIT (A) passed u/sec 147 r.w.s144B and u/sec 250 of the Act. The assesse has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the order of the CIT(A) partly sustaining addition u/sec69A of the Act made by the Assessing Officer.
Subhash Khetmal Shah. 2. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR brought to the knowledge of the bench, that there is a delay of 10 days in filing the appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal and the assesse has filed the affidavit for condonation of delay. Whereas, the facts mentioned in the affidavit are reasonable and the Ld. DR has no specific objections. Accordingly, we condone the delay and admit the appeal.
The brief facts of the case are that, the assesse is engaged in the business of sale and purchase of cloths and dealers in cloths, silver articles and jewellery. The assesse has filed the return of income for A.Y.2015-16 on 02-03-- 2016 disclosing a total income of Rs.4,42,060/- The Assessing Officer (AO) based on the information from ITBA data/STR found that the assesse has made cash deposit of Rs.8,69,000/- and other credits in bank accounts aggregating to Rs.1,13,11,469/- in the F.Y.2014-15. The assessing officer has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and has issued the notice u/sec148 of the Act on 30.03.2021 and in compliance the assesse has filed the return of income on 26.05.2021. Further notice u/sec 143(2) and u/sec142(1) of the Act was issued to furnish the details and the assessee has filed the explanations dealt at Para 5 of the order. Whereas the AO was not satisfied with the explanations on obtaining the unsecured loans from the two parties by the assesse due to insufficient details and made addition u/sec69A of the Act of Rs.50,75,402/- and assessed the total income
Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, statement of facts, submissions and findings of the AO but partly sustained the addition u/sec69A of the Act and partly allowed the assesse appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assesse has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal.
5. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in partly confirming the action of the Assessing Officer overlooking the facts and submissions of the assesse in the proceedings. The Ld.AR also submitted that the CIT(A) having accepted the repayment of unsecured loan has erred in not accepting the source. Further the assessee has a good case on merits and shall substantiate with the material evidences and prayed for an opportunity to explain before the lower authorities and relied on the factual paper book. Per Contra, the Ld.DR supported the order of the CIT(A).
We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The sole crux of the disputed issue that the CIT(A) has erred in partially sustaining the action of the A.O. in respect of unsecured loans as the transactions are not completely supported with the documentary evidences and explanations. The Ld.AR emphasized that the assessee Subhash Khetmal Shah. has submitted the details as called for by the authorities. Further the evidences play a important role in decision making in the adjudicating proceedings. Therefore we considering the facts, circumstances, evidences and to meet the ends of justice, for limited purpose restore the disputed issue to the extent of addition sustained by the CIT(A) along with the evidences to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate afresh on merits and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information,And, we allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 18.06.2025.