Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed against an addition of Rs. 32,73,000/- made by lower authorities as unexplained cash deposits for Assessment Year 2012-13, arising from reassessment proceedings under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee submitted extensive additional evidence (105 pages).
Held
The Tribunal found that the additional evidence submitted by the assessee was crucial and required factual verification by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the Assessing Officer for a fresh adjudication, providing the assessee with three effective opportunities to present and prove their case. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
Key Issues
Whether the lower authorities were justified in making an addition for unexplained cash deposits without properly considering the additional evidence, thus requiring a fresh adjudication by the Assessing Officer.
Sections Cited
147, 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara
ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1068079191(1) dated 28.08.2024, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
It emerges during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have added the assessee’s cash deposits of Rs.32,73,000/- made in the relevant previous assessment year 2011-12 as unexplained, in the course of
Faced with this situation, learned counsel has filed the assessee’s paper book running into 105 pages which more appears to be an instance of additional evidence only. The Revenue’s case is on the other hand is that the assessee’s instant additional evidence requires the learned Assessing Officer’s factual verification. It is made clear that there is no dispute between the parties that the assessee’s additional evidence submitted herein indeed goes to root of the matter. It is thus therefore deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the Assessing Officer for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.