SMT.SUSHILA SIMHAL,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO 2(1), BHOPAL
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI B.M. BIYANI
आदेश / O R D E R
Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:
Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 28.02.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 30.12.2010 passed by learned Income-tax Officer, 2(1), Bhopal [“AO”] u/s 143(3) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2008-09, the assessee has filed this appeal on following grounds:
“(1) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in upholding that the unsecured loans taken by the appellant from the following 3 persons totaling Rs. 36,73,317/- are unexplained credits and in confirming the addition of Rs. 36,73,317/- towards unexplained credits u/s 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961: Page 1 of 6
Smt. Sushila Simhal, Bhopal. ITA No. 137/Ind/2023 – AY 2008-09
Narendra Kumar Simhal HUF Rs. 34,33,317.00 2. Parvati Devi Rs. 1,50,000.00 3. Shanti Devi Agrawal Rs. 90,000.00 Rs. 36,73,317.00 (2) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in upholding that the amount of Rs. 16,75,000/- in cash deposited by the appellant in her saving bank account No. 3060 in the Malviya Nagar Branch of Union Bank of India on different dates was unexplainable and in confirming the addition of Rs. 16,75,000/- towards unexplained credits u/s 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.” 2. The background facts leading to present appeal are such that the
assessee filed return of income for AY 2008-09 declaring a total income of
Rs. 3,97,000/- but subsequently filed a revised-return declaring a total
income of Rs. 4,99,890/-. The case was then selected for scrutiny and the
AO ultimately passed order u/s 143(3) after making two additions, namely
(i) addition of Rs. 36,73,117/- on account of unexplained unsecured loans
taken by assessee and (ii) addition of Rs. 16,75,000/- on account of
unexplained deposits in bank a/c. Aggrieved, the assessee carried matter in
first-appeal but did not get any success. Now, the assessee has come in next
appeal before us.
On hearing learned representatives of both sides and perusal of orders
of lower-authorities, it is found that the AO has noted in Para 3.1 & 3.2 of
assessment-order that the assessee was asked to furnish details of loans
accepted but the assessee did not furnish any information. The AO noted
that in absence of any information about the identity, genuineness and
creditworthiness, the loans taken during the year are treated as
‘unexplained credit’ and addition made. Same way, in Para No. 4.2 of
Page 2 of 6
Smt. Sushila Simhal, Bhopal. ITA No. 137/Ind/2023 – AY 2008-09
assessment-order, the AO has noted that the assessee has not furnished
any document substantiating the source of deposit in bank a/c, therefore
the deposits made in bank a/c are treated as ‘unexplained credit’ and
addition made. Thus, the AO has made both additions on the footing that
the assessee did not file required information. Further, the CIT(A) has
upheld additions basically for the reasoning that the assessee has not filed
required information to AO. The CIT(A) has, vide Para 4.1 of his order, also
rejected the evidences placed by assessee on the footing that the assessee
filed newer evidences before him but did not file any application for
admission of new evidences under Rule 46A of Income-tax Rules, 1962.
Contrary to what is mentioned by lower-authorities, Ld. AR pleaded
before us that the assessee made submission and filed evidences to AO
during assessment-proceeding but, however, the assessee’s submission has
not been considered, instead the AO has mentioned that the assessee has
not filed evidences. In support of his pleading, Ld. AR referred certain
papers filed in paper-book. The AR also pointed out that the assessee
categorically informed to CIT(A) during first-appellate proceeding in the
letter filed at Page 1-3 of Paper-Book about various evidences having been
filed to AO. Due to such insistence of Ld. AR, the bench directed the
revenue/respondent to produce assessment-record. In response, following
letter of AO is filed by revenue:
Page 3 of 6
Smt. Sushila Simhal, Bhopal. ITA No. 137/Ind/2023 – AY 2008-09
Page 4 of 6
Smt. Sushila Simhal, Bhopal. ITA No. 137/Ind/2023 – AY 2008-09
Page 5 of 6
Smt. Sushila Simhal, Bhopal. ITA No. 137/Ind/2023 – AY 2008-09
On the basis of above letter, Ld. DR representing revenue submitted that the case-record of assessee is not traceable at present. Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the assessee is still ready to file documents to authorities, if an opportunity is given. The issue is deliberated and both sides agreed that it would be most appropriate and fair in such circumstance to re-store this matter to the file of AO so that the assessee can re-submit all details/documents required by AO. Accordingly, we remit this matter back to AO for adjudication afresh after giving necessary hearings to assessee and after considering assessee’s representation. The assessee is directed to ensure proper participation before AO and the AO shall pass order without being influenced by his previous order. Ordered accordingly.
Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in open court on 15.05.2024.
Sd/- sd/- (VIJAY PAL RAO) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Indore िदनांक /Dated : 15.05.2024 CPU/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 Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore
Page 6 of 6
