HANIF KARMAT SHAIKH,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,

आदेश / ORDER

PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM

This appeal filed by assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Aurangabad dated 25.08.2016 for assessment year 2010-11.

2 ITA No.2969/PUN/2016 A.Y.2010-11

“1. That on facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in sustaining addition towards alleged Unexplained Investments towards Cash deposits in Bank as made by the learned AO - - totally disregarding the facts and contention of Assessee that cash was deposited for making Payments to drivers of respective trucks/vehicles used in transportation of goods. -ignoring even the written submissions filed by the appellant during the course of assessment proceedings. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in sustaining the addition of Rs.30,49,700/- made by the learned AO and not considering the expenditure incurred by the assessee for the above said credits. 3. That on facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in-sustaining the additions credit entries in saving bank account added u/s.69 without appreciating the fact that the learned AO had not considered any submission of the assessee. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, substitute, modify the above grounds of appeal, if necessary on the basis of written submissions and personal presentation to be made at the time of hearing.”

19.11.2016 filed by assessee and submitted that there is delay of 43 days in

filing this appeal. The delay is occurred due to ill heath of the assessee and

the assessee could not consultant for discussion on the matter of filing the

appeal. Therefore, the instant appeal could not be filed within the prescribed

time limit of 60 days before Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Hence,

the Ld. Counsel of assessee prayed for admitting the appeal for adjudication

condoning the said delay of 43 days in filing the appeal.

dated 19.11.2016 filed by the assessee, I am of the opinion that ill health

3 ITA No.2969/PUN/2016 A.Y.2010-11

constitutes reasonable cause and hence, the delay of 43 days in filing appeal

is required to be condoned. The appeal is taken up for adjudication.

that the only issue raised by assessee is about cash deposit of

Rs.30,49,700/-. For want of explanation on the source of cash deposits, the

Assessing Officer made addition in the ex-parte assessment made u/s.144 of

the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). During First

Appellate proceedings, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition without

appreciating the evidences furnished before him or conducting enquiry into

the cross verification of the evidences and the source of cash deposits by a

couple of individuals. The assessee submitted that the cash was given by

transport contractors i.e. (i) Mr. Salim Huseaain Siddiqui of Rs.12,45,870/-

& (ii) Mr. Mohamad Amin Siddiqui of Rs.16,80,630/-.

my attention to the confirmation letters, balance sheet copies and other

financial statements of Mr. Salim & Mr. Mohammad (supra) and submitted

that these amounts consists of part addition of Rs.30,49,700/- which

requires to be examined thoroughly. Therefore, Ld. Counsel for the assessee

prayed for restoring the matter to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh

examination.

order of Assessing Officer and CIT(A).

Counsel is fair and reasonable and accordingly, I order for remanding the

4 ITA No.2969/PUN/2016 A.Y.2010-11

issue. The Assessing Officer is directed to examine thoroughly the all the documents and sources of funds/cash deposits and ownership of the same i.e. (i) Mr. Salim Huseaain Siddiqui & (ii) Mr. Mohamad Amin Siddiqui. The Assessing Officer shall examine them too as per law. The Assessing Officer shall grant reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee before repeating the additions, if any. Accordingly, grounds raised by assessee in appeal are allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced on 17th day of May, 2018.

Sd/- (डी.क�णाकरा राव/D. Karunakara Rao) लेखा सद�य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 17th May, 2018. SB आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The CIT(Appeals)-1, Aurangabad. 4. The Pr. CIT-1, Aurangabad. 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, “एक-सद�य” ब�च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 6.

// True Copy // आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,

�नजी स�चव /Private Secretary आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.