SMT. BEBI BALASO MUJAWAR,,KOLHAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, KOLHAPUR

The brief facts of the case as emanating from records are : The assessee is running a country liquor shop. A search and seizure action

The assessee in appeal has raised two grounds. In ground No. 1 the assessee has assailed the confirming of addition of Rs.1,46,570/-. In ground No. 2 the assessee has challenged the assessment framed u/s. 144 r.w.s. 153A(b) on the ground of non-issuance of statutory notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act.

Shri M.K. Kulkarni appearing on behalf of the assessee stated at the outset that he is not pressing ground No. 2 of the appeal. In so far as the merits of addition is concerned the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee in Balance sheet as on 31-03-2003 has disclosed investment in fixed deposits, therefore, it cannot be said that the investment is unaccounted or unexplained. The ld. Counsel furnished a

On the other hand Shri Achal Sharma representing the Department vehemently supported the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The ld. DR submitted that the assessee has failed to furnish any cogent evidence to support that the investment in fixed deposits is duly accounted in the books. No evidence was furnished by the assessee to support her contentions either before the Assessing Officer or before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

We have heard the submissions made by representatives of rival sides and have perused the orders of authorities below. The solitary issue pressed before us is with respect to addition of Rs.1,46,570/- on account of investment in fixed deposits. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has drawn our attention to the Balance sheet as on 31-03-2003 wherein fixed deposits of Rs.1,06,570/- are reflected. We observe that the amount which is subject matter of appeal is Rs.1,46,570/-, whereas, in the Balance sheet the amount reflected against fixed deposits is Rs.1,06,570/-. Even the details of fixed deposits reflected in the Balance sheet are not furnished by the assessee before us. The ld. Counsel submitted that an opportunity may be given to the assessee to furnish the details of fixed deposits as reflected in the books and explain the same. Taking into consideration the totality of facts, we deem it appropriate to restore this issue back to the file of Assessing Officer for the limited purpose of reconciliation of investment made in fixed deposits by the assessee. The Assessing Officer after considering the details and explanation, if any furnished by the assessee shall decide this issue, in accordance with law. Needless to say that the Assessing Officer while deciding this issue shall grant reasonable

The ld. Counsel for the assessee has stated at the Bar that he is not pressing ground No. 2 challenging the validity of assessment order passed u/s. 144 r.w.s. 153A(b) of the Act. In view of the statement made by the ld. Counsel, ground No. 2 raised in the appeal is dismissed.

The ground No. 3 is general in nature, hence requires no adjudication.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.