VISHALDEEP SURESHKUMAR DESHMUKH,SALEM vs. INDIVIDUAL, SALEM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1190/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 August 2024AY 2017-18Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi (Judicial Member), Shri Jagadish (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, in the interest of natural justice, decided to remit the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. The assessee was granted liberty to file supporting evidence before the Assessing Officer.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to comply with the show-cause notice issued by the Assessing Officer regarding cash deposits during demonetization. Consequently, the Assessing Officer made an addition of ₹.23,50,000/- for unexplained cash deposits. The CIT(A) also confirmed this addition for non-submission of evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition on account of unexplained cash deposits is sustainable without proper opportunity to the assessee to submit evidence. Whether the assessee should be granted a fresh opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadish

Hearing: 07.08.2024Pronounced: 09.08.2024

Years: 2017-18 Vishaldeep Sureshkumar Deshmukh, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of 18, Rudhrappan Street, Shevapet, Income Tax, Salem 636 002. Circle 1(1), Salem. [PAN: AEEPV7735H] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Bhuvanesh V Kankani, Advocate ��थ� की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 07.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 09.08.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the exparte order dated 26.02.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18 dismissing the appeal for want of prosecution.

2.

At the outset, we note that the Assessing Officer found cash deposits in the accounts of the assessee during demonetization period. On perusal of the assessment order, we note that no compliance were made by the assessee in response to the show-cause notice dated 23.11.2019 issued by the Assessing Officer. Having no compliance, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment inter alia making addition on account of unexplained cash deposits at ₹.23,50,000/- and determined the income of the assessee at ₹.39,65,220/-. Having aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), but, however, for non-submission of evidence in support of his claim, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer.

4.

Before us, the ld. AR Shri Bhavanesh V Kankani, Advocate prayed to afford an opportunity to the assessee as the assessee is ready to prosecute his case before the Assessing Officer without fail. Further, he submits that the assessee is ready with all documentary evidences in support of his claim and requested to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer. As discussed above, there was no compliance before the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) with relevant documentary evidences. Taking into account and undertaking as given by the ld. AR on behalf of the assessee that the assessee is ready to prosecute the case without fail, in the interest of natural justice, we deem it proper to remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.

The assessee is at liberty to file evidences, if any, before the Assessing Officer. Thus, ground Nos. 1 to 3 raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 09th August, 2024 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →