BHURAMAL TANTED,SAILANA, RATLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -2, RATLAM, RATLAM
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI B.M. BIYANI
Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM :
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order
dated 31.10.2023 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National
Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi both for the Assessment Year 2017-
The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal.
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC (‘ the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC’) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.17,89,000/- made by the Ld. Income Tax Officer-2, Ratlam (‘the Ld. Assessing Officer’) without
ITA No.559/Ind/2023 Bhuramal Tanted considering the facts of the case. Thus, the addition of Rs.17,89,000/- is liable to be deleted. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC and the Ld.AO have erred in not appreciating that the assessee is a Kisan (Agriculturist) and cash has been deposited out of accumulated and agriculture income of the assessee who was aged 93 years during the relevant Assessment Year 2017-18 and residing in rural area. Thus, the addition of Rs.17,89,000/- made without considering the facts and circumstances of the case is liable to be deleted. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the.AO has erred in making addition of Rs.17,89,000/- without appreciating that amount of Rs.17,89,000/- is very reasonable considering the facts and situation of the assessee who is a Kisan (Agriculturist) aged 93 years residing in rural area of village Sailana. Thus, the addition of Rs.17,89,000/- is liable to be deleted. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the.AO has erred in not considering the documentary evidences (additional e3vidences) furnished by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC against the appeal filed against Ex-parte Assessment order dated 05.11.2019 and not doing so is wrong and contrary to the provisions of the Act. Thus, the order u/s 250 of the Act dated 31.10.2023 is liable to be quashed. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any of the grounds of appeal. 2. At the time of hearing Ld. AR submitted that Ld. A.O has
passed an ex-parte order u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act whereby
the addition of Rs.17,89,000/- has been made on account of
unexplained deposits in the bank accounts of the assessee. The Ld.
AR has further submitted that the assessee filed the submissions
before Ld. CIT(A) along with supporting evidences comprising of
land holding record of the assessee to show the agriculture income
as source of deposits in the bank account. Apart from the land
holding and revenue record the bank account statements were also
ITA No.559/Ind/2023 Bhuramal Tanted filed before Ld. CIT(A) however, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the
appeal of the assessee and confirmed the addition made by the Ld.
A.O on the ground that the assessee has not furnished any
documentary evidences in support of his claim. The Ld. AR has
submitted that the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) is contrary to the
fact as the assessee produced all relevant supporting evidences
alongwith written submissions before Ld. CIT(A) but he failed to
consider the said documentary evidences while passing the
impugned order. He has referred to the paper book running into
35 pages and submitted that the written submissions alongwith the
other supporting evidences were duly filed before Ld. CIT(A) but the
same has not been considered. Therefore the Ld. AR pleaded that
the impugned order be set aside and the matter may be remanded
to the record of the Ld. A.O for fresh adjudication after considering
the explanation of the assessee as well as supporting evidences.
On the other hand Ld. DR has not seriously opposed the
prayer of the assessee for remanding the matter to the record of the
jurisdictional A.O for fresh adjudication.
ITA No.559/Ind/2023 Bhuramal Tanted
We have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant
material on record. The assessee filed his return of income on
31.03.2018 declaring total income of Rs.4,96,040/-. In the
scrutiny assessment the case was taken up to verify the large cash
deposited during the demonetization period. Since there was no
reply on behalf of the assessee to the notice issued by the Ld. A.O
therefore, he proceeded to frame the assessment on best judgment
basis u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act and made the addition of
entire deposit of Rs.17,89,000/-. Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the
addition made by the Ld. A.O in para 7 and 8 as under:-
Findings 7.1 I have carefully considered the submissions of the appellant as well as perused the order u/s 144 and the grounds of appeal have been examined. The grounds of appeal are effectively directed against assessment u/s 144 and application of section 115BBE and since they are inter related, they are taken together and adjudicated together. 7.2 The Assessing Officer has made addition u/s 69 considering the cash deposits as unexplained money of the appellant as the appellant has not complied to any of the notices during the assessment proceeding thereby failing to explain the source of cash deposits. 7.3 During the appellate proceeding, the appellant furnished his submission which has been examined. The appellant furnished his explanation where he stated that this deposit was from business receipts and a portion of savings accrued from agricultural income over the many preceding years. Further he stated that he had also given some amounts on loan to small farmers on which he had earned interest income of Rs.81524/- and such loans were also received back and deposited during the year.
ITA No.559/Ind/2023 Bhuramal Tanted However, it is seen that the appellant has not furnished any documentary evidence in support of his claims. In the absence of any documentary evidence to proof his claim, the genuineness of his claims cannot be verified. Therefore, I am of the view that the appellant has failed explain the source of cash deposits and the Assessing Officer has rightly treated it as unexplained money u/s 69A. The case laws cited supra by the appellant are also considered distinguishable from the case of the appellant. 8. Decision 8.1 In view of the discussion as above, I am of the view that the Assessing Officer has rightly treated it the unexplained cash deposits as unexplained money u/s 69A and accordingly taxed it u/s 115BBE. The addition of Rs.17,89,000/- is hereby confirmed. Accordingly the grounds of appeal are hereby dismissed. 5. Thus it is clear that the Ld. CIT(A) has mentioned that he has
carefully considered the submissions of the assessee but the
addition was confirmed on the ground that the assessee has not
furnished any documentary evidence in support of the claim. The
assessee has produced before us the supporting evidences
comprising of the agricultural land holding, revenue record, bank
account statements which were stated to be filed alongwith written
submissions before Ld. CIT(A). Since the evidence which are placed
in the paper book have not been considered by the authorities
below therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in
the interest of justice, we are of the considered opinion that the
matter requires a proper verification and examination of the
ITA No.559/Ind/2023 Bhuramal Tanted
relevant record and evidences produced by the assessee at the level
of the Ld. A.O. Accordingly the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is
set aside and the matter is remanded to the record of jurisdictional
Ld. A.O for fresh adjudication after considering the explanation of
the assessee as well as verification and examination of the relevant
evidences filed by the assessee.
In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for
statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 31.05.2024.
Sd/- Sd/- (B.M. BIYANI) (VIJAY PAL RAO) Accountant Member Judicial Member
Indore,_31.05.2024 Dev/Sr. PS
Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Sr. Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore
