SUKUMAR SHAW,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD-48(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 396/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 September 2018AY 2013-144 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred by confirming the AO's order without considering the assessee's written submissions or providing an opportunity to produce evidence regarding the source of funds for the property purchase. The AO's order was also passed without sufficient opportunity for the assessee to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee purchased an immovable property for Rs. 55 lakhs in Kolkata during the previous year relevant to A.Y. 2013-14. The assessee's appeal challenges the CIT(A)'s order confirming the AO's assessment.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) and AO provided sufficient opportunity to the assessee to explain the sources of funds for acquiring immovable property. Whether the AO's order passed under Section 144 was justified without proper notice and opportunity to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C “ BENCH KOLKATA

Before: Hon’ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, AM & Smt. Madhumita Roy, JM ]

Hearing: 11.09.2018

The instant appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 31.12.2016 passed by the ld. CIT(A)-14, Kolkata arising out of the order dated 11.03.2016 passed by the I.T.O., Ward-48(3) Kolkata for A.Y.2013-14.

2.

The assessee has also filed revised grounds of appeal with the revised statement of facts before us. The revised grounds are as follows :-

“1. For that, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals)-14/Kolkata erred and not justified in passing his order dated 31/12/2016 confirming the order of the A.O. without considering the written submission of the appellant and without giving opportunity to the appellant to produce evidences and details of the sources of fund for acquiring the immovable property mentioned in the order of assessment.

2. For that, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals)-14/Kolkata, erred and not justified in confirming the order of the A.O." passed u/s 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961, which was passed by the A.O. without giving sufficient opportunity being heard to the appellant to explain his return with documents and details regarding the sources of funds of the appellant for acquiring the immovable property mentioned in the order of assessment.

3.

For that, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals)-14/Kolkata, erred and not justified in confirming the unlawful order of the A.O. passed u/s 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961, when the appellant did not receive any notice issued u/s 142( 1) of the I T Act and / or letters by the A.O. asking for the details, document and evidences relating to the funds used for acquiring the immovable property by the appellant in the F.Y. 2012-13 relevant to the assessment year 2013-14.

4. For that, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order passed by the Ld CIT (Appeals)-14/Kolkata on 31/12/2016 as well as the order passed by the A.O. in the case of the appellant are bad in law.

5.

For that, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the order passed by the Ld CIT (Appeals)-14/Kolkata on 31/12/2016 as well as the order passed by the A.O. in the case of the appellant deserve to be set aside and appropriate relief may be given to the appellant.

6. For that the appellant craves leave for addition, alteration/modification and deletion in the grounds of appeal before the Honourable Tribunal.”

3. Further that the assessee has filed an application for consideration of the additional evidences in support of his claim.

4.

The brief facts leading to this case is this that the assessee during the previous year relevant to A.Y.2013-14 had purchased an immovable property being a flat measuring 840 sq ft. for a consideration of Rs.55 lakhs on 03.01.2013 at Kolkata. The same was registered before the office of the District Sub Registrar, South 24 parganas, West Bengal. An amount of Rs.20,50,000/- has been paid from the assessee’s own fund for purchasing the said property and the balance amount of Rs.34,50,000/- was paid through housing loan. The required stamp duty and registration charges were also duly paid. The valuation of the said property was determined at Rs.56,41,600/-. The entire investment is reflected in the balance sheet of the assessee as on 31.03.2013.

5. Admittedly the assessee working abroad and all the documents relating to the source of fund for acquisition of the said immovable property could not be furnished before the AO on the date of hearing on 20.10.2014. A show cause notice was sent to him as to why the entire amount of Rs.56,41,.600/- should not be added to his income when no reply could be furnished by the assessee before the ld. AO. However, in the absence of these documents or any detailed explanation on this issue a total addition of Rs.56,41,600/- has been made by the ld. AO against which appeal was preferred before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee during the appellate proceedings was unable to provide the evidences to show the source of fund to justify his bona fide and therefore the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the ld. AO.

6.

Before us the assessee explained his inability to produce the relevant documents in support of his claim to show the source of fund which in our considered view is sufficient to prove his bona fide. The documents were also placed before us by way of an application for additional evidences. At the time of hearing of the appeal the ld. AR argued before us for taking into consideration of these additional evidences for disposing of the matter in favour of the assessee. He thus prays to remit the issue to the file of the AO to consider these documents for proper adjudication of the matter. However, the ld. DR raised no objection to the argument advanced by the ld. AR.

7.

Having heard the ld. Representative for the parties and having regard to the relevant materials available on record we are of the considered opinion that in the interest of justice the issue be remitted to the file of the ld. AO. We therefore set aside the orders passed by the authorities below and direct the ld. AO to reconsider the issue upon giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee and upon considering the evidences already placed on record and the documents which the assessee may choose to file at the time of hearing of the matter which is relevant to the germane of the issue involved.

8.

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Court on 26.09.2018.

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →