Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed against separate orders concerning quantum appeal and penalty for AY 2013-14. The Assessing Officer made a cash addition of Rs. 105.51 Lacs, which was confirmed by the CIT(A) due to lack of documentary evidence. The assessee argued that the cash deposits were reflected in the proprietorship concern after the firm converted.
Held
The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the assessment back to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment after verification of facts. The assessee was directed to substantiate its stand.
Key Issues
Whether cash deposits were duly reflected in the proprietorship concern after the firm's conversion, and the validity of the addition made by the Assessing Officer.
Sections Cited
147, 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” BENCH, AGRA
Before: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid quantum appeal as well as penalty appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14 arises out of separate orders of first appellate authority. First, we take up quantum appeal which arises out of an order passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [CIT(A)] on 08-02- 2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act on 26-03-2022. The Ld. AR argued that the impugned cash deposits were duly been reflected in proprietorship concern since the firm converted into proprietorship concern w.e.f. 01-04- 2012. The Ld. Sr. DR stated that these facts require verification by Ld. AO.
In the assessment order, Ld. AO made cash addition of Rs.105.51 Lacs in the hands of the assessee firm despite the submissions of the assessee that the firm was dissolved and these transactions were reflected in the hands of Shri Abhishek Khandelwal. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the same for want of documentary evidences. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.
Considering the submissions of Ld. AR, we set aside the impugned order and restore the assessment back to the file of Ld. AO for de novo assessment after verification of aforesaid facts. The assessee is directed to substantiate its stand.
ITA No,808/Del/2024 is consequential penalty which also stand restored back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh consideration in the light of de novo assessment to framed by Ld. AO.
Both the appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes as indicated upon conclusion of hearing. Order pronounced u/r 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) "ाियक सद" /JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद" /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 23-04-2025 आदेश की "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant 2. ""थ"/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु"/CIT 4. िवभागीय"ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड"फाईल/GF