What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessment order was passed under Section 144 without granting adequate opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside and the matter was remitted back to the AO for fresh adjudication.

The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 10,80,000/- towards cash deposit in the assessee's bank account based on AIR information. The assessee failed to provide the source of the deposit despite opportunities, leading to a best judgment assessment under Section 144.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessment order passed under Section 144 was valid without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee to explain the source of cash deposits.

Sujeet Kumar Mishra, New Delhi vs ITO | ITAT Delhi 2016

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES : G : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL, AM & MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM

For Appellant: Ms Geetanjali

For Respondent: Ms Anima Bernwal, Sr. DR

Hearing: 17.05.2016Pronounced: 18.05.2016

Date of Hearing : 17.05.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 18.05.2016 ORDER

PER R.S. SYAL, AM:

This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by the CIT(A) on 12.8.2013 in relation to the assessment year 2008-09.

The only issue raised in this appeal is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.10,80,000/- towards cash deposit in the assessee’s bank account. The AO got an AIR information indicating that the assessee deposited a sum of Rs.10.80 lac in his savings bank account maintained with Axis Bank Ltd. On being called upon to furnish the source of such cash deposit in the savings bank account, the assessee sought adjournment. One more opportunity was granted, which was not availed by the assessee. Since the assessment was getting time barred, the AO finalized the assessment u/s 144 of the Act, making addition of Rs.10.80 lac. The ld. CIT(A) sustained the addition.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. The ld. AR submitted that the assessment order was passed u/s 144 of the Act without granting adequate opportunity to the assessee to present his case and the same position prevailed in so far as the appellate proceedings are concerned. It was, therefore, prayed that one more opportunity be granted for putting forth the entire factual position in right perspective explaining the source of cash. We find that there are certain aspects which are not clear from the assessment order for the obvious reason of the assessment order having been passed u/s 144.

Under these circumstances, we set aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the file of AO for deciding the issue afresh, as per law, after allowing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 2

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

SUJEET KUMAR MISHRA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments