SUBRAMANI BALAMURUGAN,THAMMAMPATTY vs. ITO, WARD 1(6), SALEM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 889/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 July 2024AY 2017-18Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to provide substantiation for the cash deposits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-18 concerns an addition of Rs. 10.29 Lacs made by the AO for unexplained cash deposits. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition as the assessee could not provide a valid explanation.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to substantiate the source of cash deposits before the lower appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” �ायपीठ चे�ई म�। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय �ी महावीर िसंह, उपा ! एवं माननीय �ी मनोज कुमार अ%वाल ,लेखा सद( के सम!। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Subramani Balamurugan ITO बनाम/ 3, Sri Dhanam Stores, Ward-1(6), Mariyamman Kovil Street Salem. Vs. Udayarpalayam, Thammampatty-636 113. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AWIPB-7707-M (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri S.Sridhar(Advocate) Erode - Ld.AR � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT) - Ld. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 24-06-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 03-07-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of an order passed by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] on 29-01-2024 in the matter of an an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s 143(3) of the Act on 30-12-2019. The registry has noted delay of 4 days in the appeal, which stand condoned.

2.

During hearing, Ld. AR drew attention to para-6 of the impugned order and pleaded for another opportunity of hearing before lower authorities which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR. In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition of cash deposit for Rs.10.29 Lacs since the assessee could not submit any valid explanation. The situation remained the same during first appellate proceedings. Accordingly, impugned addition was confirmed. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is in a position to substantiate the same if another opportunity is granted to the assessee.

3.

Accepting the prayer of Ld. AR, we restore the appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case.

4.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 3rd July,2024 Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) उपा45 / VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद7 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे9ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated :03-07-2024 DS आदेशकीIितिलिपअ%ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. � थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयुA/CIT Salem. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडFफाईल/GF

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →