MOTILAL PNACHALAL GALA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 22(1)(3), MUMBAI

अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant by : Shri Rahul K Hakani & Ms. Neelam C Jadhav प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent by : Ms. Jotilakshmi Nayak, DR सुनवाई की तायीख / Date of Hearing : 15.03.2017 घोषणा की तायीख /Date of Pronouncement : 07.04.2017 आदेश / O R D E R

PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM:

and the facts of the case and submitted that the assessee is a trader in cotton fabric and manufacturer of school bags. Assessee maintains a bank account in ICICI bank. During the assessment proceedings, AO noted the cash deposits in the said bank account and they totalled to Rs. 35,18,669/-. In the assessment, AO made addition u/s 68 of the Act. Further, AO also added another sum of Rs. 2 lakhs of loan credits from Bhavana J Shah and Sumatilala H Modi (HUF) u/s 68 of the Act. Matter travelled to the first appellate authority.

3. During the proceedings before the first appellate authority, after considering the submissions of the assessee, CIT (A) confirmed the additions made by the AO. Aggrieved, assessee is in further appeal before the Tribunal.

4. On the first addition of Rs. 35,18,669/-, deviating from the Ground no.1, Ld AR submitted that AO may resist this addition and allow the benefit of telescopy and made addition, if any. Ld AR highlighted that the telescopy is not a lion to the Income Tax proceedings. After hearing both the parties on this issue, we approve the arguments of the Ld AR. Accordingly we order. In the set aside proceedings, AO is directed to examine the cash withdrawal and deposit position from all the bank accounts of the assessee with ICICI and other banks, if any, and rework at the addition. Assessee is also directed to explain the above and file relevant details / statement. AO is further directed to undertake comprehensive study into the withdrawals and deposits in cash. Accordingly, all additional evidences are admitted and the matter is remanded to the file of the AO with above directions. Assessee shall be granted a reasonable opportunity of being heard as per the set principles of natural justice. Thus, the relevant ground is allowed for statistical purposes.

5. Regarding the addition of Rs. 2 lakhs, we are of the view that both the loan creditors are tax payers and filed their return of income to the IT Department. On this issue, it is the prayer of the Ld AR that this issue should also be remanded to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication and decision. Accordingly we order and the matter is remanded to the AO’s file with identical directions. Thus, relevant ground raised

by the assessee is allowed.

6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 07th April, 2017.