Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR
Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.107/RPR/2015 Assessment Year : 2004-05 Manju Kedia, ACIT- 2(1), Kedia Bhawan, Mandi Road, Raipur (CG). Balod Bazar, Distt. Raipur, Vs. Raipur (CG).
PAN : AEVPK0722L (Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by : Shri R.B. Doshi, CA Department by : Shri Sanjay Kumar, DR Date of hearing : 10-08-2018 Date of pronouncement : 16-08-2018 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, AM : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 26.03.2015 of the ld. CIT(A)- 1, Raipur (CG) relating to assessment year 2004-05. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and filed her return of income on 31.03.2005 declaring total income of Rs.1,39,040/-. On the basis of search carried out at the premises of Shri Ramesh Kedia and others on 23.03.2006, the notice u/s 153C was issued in the name of the assessee. The assessee earned income from salary and income from other sources. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee
2 ITA No.107/RPR/2015
has shown a credit balance in her Balance Sheet in the name of Shri
Ramnarayan Pandey, Baloda Bazar – Rs.1,31,000/- and Shri Durgavati Pandey,
Baloda Bazar – Rs.1,21,000/-. The Assessing Officer asked the assessee to
substantiate the creditworthiness and genuineness of the loan taken in cash.
Since the assessee failed to substantiate with proper documentary evidence to
the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer, the Assessing Officer made addition of
Rs.2,52,000/- u/s 68 to the total income of the assessee.
In appeal, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee.
Aggrieved with such order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal
before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal :-
“1. Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of Rs.2,52,000/- made u/s 68, on account of amount received by appellant as advance against sale of land. The addition made by the A.O. and sustained by CIT(A) is not justified. 2. Without prejudice to the above grounds of appeal, the A.O. erred in invoking section 153C & in passing assessment order. The notice u/s 153C issued by the A.O. and the consequent assessment order is illegal, without jurisdiction, not in accordance with law. 3. The appellant reserves the right to add, amend or alter any of the ground/s of appeal.”
The ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the addition made by the
Assessing Officer is not based on any incriminating material. Therefore, the
provisions of section 153C are not applicable to the facts of the present case. So
far as merit of the case is concerned, he submitted that the assessee has given
confirmation letters from the two lenders. Therefore, the addition made by the
Assessing Officer and sustained by the ld. CIT(A) is not justified.
3 ITA No.107/RPR/2015
The ld. DR on the other hand heavily relied on the orders of the
Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A). Referring to the confirmation letters filed
by the assessee in the Paper Book, he submitted that these are mere papers and
are self-serving documents and do not substantiate the creditworthiness of the
loan creditors. Therefore, the addition made by the Assessing Officer and
sustained by the ld. CIT(A) is fully justified.
We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides and
perused the material available on record. It is the case of the ld. counsel for the
assessee that in absence of any incriminating material relating to this particular
year, invoking of provisions of section 153C is bad in law. A perusal of the
orders of the Assessing Officer as well as the ld. CIT(A) shows that the basis of
addition does not refer to any incriminating material. Although, the assessee
has challenged the legal ground before the ld. CIT(A) as per ground of no.2,
however we find there is no adjudication on this issue. Considering the totality
of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore
this issue to the file of Assessing Officer with a direction to adjudicate the issue
afresh in light of the latest decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of
CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society. The Assessing Officer shall
decide the issue afresh and in accordance with law after giving due opportunity
of being heard to the assessee. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds
raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
4 ITA No.107/RPR/2015
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical
purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 16th August, 2018.
Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (R. K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 16-08-2018. Sujeet Copy of order to: - 1) The Appellant 2) The Respondent 3) The CIT 4) The CIT(A) 5) The DR, I.T.A.T., Raipur. By Order //True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Raipur