HOLADAGADDE DEVARAJ VINAY RAJ ,CHIKMAGALUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, CHIKMAGALUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1183/BANG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 July 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI (Accountant Member), SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acceded to the assessee's request for another opportunity to present their case. The matter was remitted to the NFAC for a fresh decision after providing a hearing opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an agriculturist, filed their return for AY 2017-18 stating cash deposits of Rs. 27,00,000/- from sale proceeds and past savings. The AO made an addition under section 69A, which was confirmed by the NFAC. Notices were issued multiple times with no proper reply or submission.

What were the issues?

Whether the cash deposits are to be treated as unexplained income and whether business expenditure (interest on loan) and carry forward losses are to be allowed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 69A,Section 143(3),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI & SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV

Hearing: 22.07.2024Pronounced: 22.07.2024

PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

This appeal by assessee is directed against order of NFAC for the assessment year 2017-18 dated 16.4.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”), wherein the assessee raised following grounds of appeal:

1) The Order passed by Learned Assessing Officer & confirmed by the First Appellate Authority is bad in law. 2) The learned Assessing Officer has erred in treating the cash deposits amounting to Rs.27,00,000/- out of sale proceeds of agricultural produce, as unexplained income under section 68, of the Income Tax Act, 1961 3) The Learned Assessing Officer has erred in disallowing the business expenditure, being interest on loan amounting to Rs.3,43,829/- .

Holadagadde Devaraj Vinay Raj, Chikmagalur Page 2 of 3 4) The Learned Assessing Officer has erred in not allowing the carry forward losses of the current year amounting to Rs.5,71 ,520/-. 5) The Appellant craves permission to add, alter, amend, and to modify, substitute, delete and to rescind all or any of the Grounds of Appeal, on or before the Hearing, if necessary, so arises.

2.

Facts of the case are that the assessee is an agriculturist. The assessee has filed the Income Tax Returns for the A.Y.2017-18 on 28.01.2018. During the said year, the assessee has stated to have deposited the proceeds from cash sales and past year savings to the Bank amounting to Rs.27,00,000/-. The Learned Assessing Officer passed the order u/s 143(3) of the Act on 24.12.2019 making addition under section 69A of the Act. Therefore, the Assessee preferred the appeal before the ld. CIT(A).

2.1 In the instant case, notices of hearing have been issued number of times but nobody attended/replied. The details of the same are as under:-

Date of Date of hearing Remarks Notice

29.01.2021 25.02.2021 No reply received.

07.11.2022 Enabled the appellant Issued Emblements of to respond any time communication window w.r.t. grounds of appeal

07.02.2024 15.02.2024 No reply received.

2.2 However, there was no proper submission made by assessee before NFAC. Hence, NFAC confirmed the order of ld. AO. Thus, assessee is in appeal before us.

2.3 Before us, ld. A.R. submitted that assessee was not well versed in ITBA portal and as such assessee has not filed submissions before

Holadagadde Devaraj Vinay Raj, Chikmagalur Page 3 of 3 NFAC and prayed that one more opportunity to file necessary details before NFAC may be given.

3.

After hearing both the parties, we accede to the request of the ld. A.R. and remit the entire issue to the file of NFAC to decide the same after giving an opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 22nd July, 2024

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →