KANDASAMY MANI,SALEM vs. ITO, WARD-1(1) , SALEM

This appeal by the assessee is against the order dated 29.12.2023 passed by the Addl/JCIT(A), Thane for the assessment year 2011-12.

Ground Nos. 1, 3 and 4 are general in nature and requires no adjudication.

Ground No. 2 is not pressed. 4. Ground Nos. 5 to 8 raised by the assessee in challenging the action of first appellate authority in confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of land development expenses.

The ld. AR Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate submits that the assessee shown short term capital gains of ₹.30,86,167/- after deducting ₹.10,44,755/- as land development expenditure. The Assessing Officer asked the assessee to furnish the details of such land development expenses. The assessee explained that he was not in a position to submit the same and accordingly, the Assessing Officer added the said amount to the total income of the assessee. Before the ld. CIT(A), the said details were filed as an additional evidences and remand report were sought for from the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer, in the remand report, for not submitting the books of accounts, reiterated the same addition, as made earlier, in the hands of the assessee.

The ld. AR submits that the Assessing Officer did not ask the books of account during the remand proceedings, as were filed in the original assessment proceedings. He further submits that the assessee is ready to produce the books of account before the Assessing Officer and requested to remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

The ld. DR vehemently opposed the same.

Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. On perusal of the record, we note that during the assessment proceedings, it was stated that the assessee was not in a position to produce the details of land development expenditure, which is clear from page No. 3 of the assessment order, we find the same were filed before the ld. CIT(A) by way of additional evidence in the form of bills and vouchers. The ld. CIT(A) sought remand report, but, however, for non- production of books of accounts, the Assessing Officer reiterated the same addition. The first appellate authority, for non-production of complete evidences, confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer.

The assessee, placed on record the notice dated 17.10.2023 issued by the Assessing Officer in the remand proceedings at page 25 of appeal memo, wherein, it is noted that the Assessing Officer requested the assessee to furnish original bills, bank statement and original receipt from 3rd party. As rightly pointed out by the ld. AR, books of accounts were not asked by the Assessing Officer. The ld. AR contends that books of accounts were produced during the course of assessment proceedings and since no request made by the Assessing Officer, the assessee did not produce the same in the remand proceedings. But, however, the assessee is ready to produce now, in case this Tribunal afford an opportunity to the assessee for furnishing books of account. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. The assessee shall submit all details in support of his claim. Thus, ground Nos. 5 to 8 is allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 05th June, 2024 at Chennai.