SRI. A. NAGARAJU,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

The assessee has raised several grounds but the grievances are two. First grievance is about treating agricultural income of Rs. 11.41 Lacs as non agricultural income and the second grievance is about making addition of Rs. 8.19 Lacs being cash deposit in bank as unexplained investment.

Learned AR of the assessee submitted that on pages 7 to 24 of the paper book are various documents in support of the claim about agricultural income but since these documents are required to be translated in English, the matter may be adjourned to enable the assessee to get the same translated. At this juncture, it was observed by the bench that even if the time is granted and the assessee files the translated documents, the matter has to go back as translated copy was not made available to the lower authorities. In reply, he submitted that the matter may be restored to CIT (A) and the assessee will furnish the translated copy before him and thereafter, he may pass a fresh order. Learned DR of the revenue supported the order of CIT (A).

I have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. I feel it proper to restore the matter back to CIT (A) for a fresh decision. Accordingly, I set aside the order of CIT (A) and restore the matter back to his file with the direction that he should provide reasonable opportunity to the assessee to file the translated copy of the documents and thereafter, he should pass a reasoned and speaking order as per law after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to both sides.

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