SHRI SATISH PARASHAR,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by the CIT(A) on 30.11.2009 in relation to the Assessment Year 2006-07.

The assessee has challenged the confirmation of addition in respect of three credits, viz., Shri Ashok Gupta, M/s. Shivang Enterprises and Shri Rishikant, Faridabad. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a builder who filed his return declaring total income at Rs.3,31,140/- During the 2 I.T.A.No.633./Del/2010 course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had shown to have raised loans from certain parties. The assessee was called upon to prove the genuineness of certain credits including the above three. The assessee filed some details including confirmations from these three persons. As regards the closing balance of the creditor Shri Ashok Gupta amounting to Rs.22.00 lac, the Assessing Officer observed that there was no mention of any cheque number, date, name of the bank etc. in the Confirmation and only PAN was given, which was not enough. As regards M/s. Shivang Enterprises, he observed that a sum of R.5,00,000/- was appearing to the credit of this account. The Confirmation filed by the assessee was found to be lacking qua mention of cheque number, date and name of the bank. Similarly, as regards Shri Rishikant, Faridabad, from whom credit of Rs.6,00,000/- was shown to have been received as advance against land, the AO found the Confirmation to be lacking in respect of mention of description of the land against which advance was given. In view of the above facts, the Assessing Officer concluded that the genuineness of these credits was not proved. He, therefore, made an addition of Rs.22,00,000/-, being the amount appearing as credit in the name of Shri Ashok Gupta,

The assessee filed additional evidence before the ld. CIT(A), who called for a remand report from the Assessing Officer. Considering the remand report, the ld. CIT(A) upheld the addition of Rs.5,00,000/- in the case of Shivang Enterprises, Rs.6,00,000/- in the case of Rishikant and Rs.30,00,000/- in case of Shri Ashok Gupta. This addition of Rs.30,00,000/- was affirmed by the ld. CIT(A) in view of the fact that the assessee had shown to have raised loan of Rs.30,00,000/- out of which a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- was paid to Shri Ashok Gupta during the year under consideration and the Assessing Officer had made addition of Rs.22,00,000/- only, being the closing balance. Here, it is pertinent to mention that certain other additions were also made by the AO, which stood deleted in the first appeal. The ld. DR has not brought to our notice any cross appeal having been filed by the Revenue.

Apart from the grounds raised in the memo of appeal, challenging the confirmation of addition of Rs.22,00,000/-, Rs.5,00,000/- and Rs.6,00,000/- in respect of additions made by the Assessing Officer on account of credits appearing in the name of Shri Ashok Gupta, M/s. Shivang Enterprises and Shri Rishikant Faridabad, the assessee has also raised two

We have heard rival submissions and perused the relevant material available on record. It is observed form the assessment order that the assessee could not file necessary details before the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings because of the fact that the effective proceedings were taken up by the Assessing Officer vide his letter dated 15.12.2008 requiring the assessee to furnish evidence in support of genuineness of these credits. Since the assessment was getting time barred on 31.12.2008, the Assessing Officer passed the order making these additions without giving adequate hearing opportunity to the assessee. During the 5 I.T.A.No.633./Del/2010 course of the first appellate proceedings, the assessee placed on record some additional evidence in support of the genuineness of credits, which were sent by the ld. CIT(A) to the Assessing Officer for considering the same and then sending the remand report. The ld. A.R. contended that during the remand proceedings also, the Assessing Officer did not call the assessee even for once and sent the remand report by considering whatever material was sent by the ld. CIT(A) to him. In this backdrop of the factual matrix, we are satisfied that to meet the ends of justice, it would be appropriate to set aside the impugned order and restore the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication of the instant issues. We order accordingly and direct the Assessing Officer to examine the genuineness or otherwise of the credits appearing in the names of Shri Ashok Gupta, M/s. Shivang Enterprises and Shir Rishikant, Faridabad afresh after allowing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 25th May, 2016.