BASAVRAJ TANGADI,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6, BELAGAVI

सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing 07.01.2025 घोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement 08.01.2025 ORDER

PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM:

Basavraj Tangadi 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assesse has filed the return of income on 24-11-2017 for A.Y.2017-18 disclosing a total income of Rs.14,02,810/- The Assessing Officer (AO) based on the information from ITBA data, found that the assesse has made cash deposits in the bank accounts during the demonetization period and the case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS . Further the notice u/sec143(2) and u/sec 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire are issued and there was compliance by the assesse. Whereas the A.O found that the assesse has made the cash deposits aggregating to Rs.1,37,73,300/-in six bank accounts in the F.Y.2016-17 and explanations were called to substantiate the deposits. And the assessee has filed the explanations about the money lending business supported with cash book of F.Y.2016-17, details of Loans, receipts of money lending business and bankwise cash deposits and credits. Whereas as the AO has considered the information and was not satisfied with the explanations and dealt on the provisions of the Act and made addition(i) u/sec69A of the Act of Rs.59,12,300/-(ii) addition u/sec68 of the Act of Rs.2,00,000/- and (iii) estimated the income from money lending business of Rs.2,97,840/- and assessed the total income of Rs.78,12,950/- and passed the order u/sec 143(3) of the Act dated 26.12.2019.

Basavraj Tangadi 3. 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, findings of the AO and has issued notices of hearing and the assessee has filed the submissions on various dates. But the CIT(A) has confirmed the action of the A.O and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal.

4. We heard the Ld.DR submissions and perused the material on record and none appeared on behalf of the assesse. The sole crux of the disputed issues envisaged by the assesse that the CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the additions without providing proper opportunity and overlooking the facts and material evidences. The assesse has filed the substantial details before the lower authorities and the CIT(A) has not considered the facts of availability of cash balance and sources with the assessee. Prima-facie the CIT(A) has dealt on the findings of the AO and has not considered the submissions/ evidences of the assessee. Therefore, we considering the overall facts, circumstances and principles of natural justice shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing and accodingly restore the disputed issue to the file of the CIT(A) for afresh adjudication and the CIT(A) shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and the assessee should also cooperate in submitting the

Order pronounced in the open court on 08.01.2025.