DIVYA THOTTATHIL JOSEPH,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO, NON CORP WARD-1(1), KOCHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 298/COCH/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 November 2024Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI AMARJIT SINGH (Accountant Member)5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the evidence presented by the assessee was not specifically refuted by the Revenue. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer added Rs. 22,57,100/- as unexplained cash credits under Section 68. The CIT(A) upheld this addition. The assessee's counsel presented evidence regarding price fluctuations in the spices market.

What were the issues?

Whether the cash credits added under Section 68 were adequately explained by the assessee, and whether the evidence provided was properly considered and refuted by the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH

Hearing: 23.08.2024Pronounced: 07.11

ORDER PER BENCH : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2020-2021 arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) / NFAC vide DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1060906359(1) dated 14.02.2024 in proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act” hereinafter.

2.

Both the learned representatives at the outset invite our attention to the CIT(A)’s lower appellate discussion upholding assessment findings.

3.

We find during the course of hearing that the Assessing Officer had added sec.68 unexplained cash credits of Rs.22,57,100/- in assessee’s hands which stand upheld in the CIT(A)-NFAC’s lower appellate discussion as follows :

4.

Learned counsel has filed assessee’s paper book running into 66 pages in support of his “price fluctuations” plea in spices market.

5.

Learned DR fails to dispute that all of the said evidence(s) has nowhere been specifically refuted as per sec.250(6) of the Act.

6.

Faced with this situation, we deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)-NFAC for it’s afresh adjudication, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing, subject to the rider that it shall be the taxpayer’s onus and responsibility only to plead and prove all the relevant facts in the consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

Order pronounced in the open court on 7th day of November, 2024.

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →