SMT. POONAM SIDHU,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, W-7(3), LUDHIANA

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

The captioned appeals have been preferred by the assessee

against the separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax

(Appeals)-4, Ludhiana [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] dated

21.06.2017 & 14.7.2017 respectively.

1411/Chd/2017) is barred by limitation of 20 days. The assessee

has moved an application for condonation of delay, wherein, it

has been explained that the appeal was prepared well within time

and also the fee for filing the appeal before the Tribunal was also

deposited in time but since assessee was residing abroad the same

ITA Nos. 1411 & 1412/Chd/2017- Smt. Poonam Sidhu, Ludhiana 2

was sent to her for signatures, which resulted in delay in filing

the appeal. The detailed reasons have been furnished in the

application. In view of the reasons given in the application and

also considering the shortness of the period of delay, the delay of

20 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned.

ITA No. 1411/Chd/2017 is against the quantum additions 3.

confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A), whereas, ITA No. 1412/Chd/2011 is

against the confirmation of penalty levied by the Assessing officer

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.

quantum additions i.e. ITA No. 1411/Chd/2017. The Assessing

officer has made the impugned additions on the basis of unexplained

cash credits found in the bank account of the assessee.

the assessee is a non-resident and that during the assessment

proceedings, the assessee was not present in India. Though, the

assessee was represented through her counsel, however, the true and

correct facts could not be brought before the Assessing officer

regarding the source of deposits found in the bank account of the

assessee. It has been further pleaded that apart from the deposits out

of early withdrawals by the assessee from her bank account, certain

deposits were also out of sale proceeds of land sold by the husband

of the assessee namely Shri Parminder Singh Sidhu. The Ld.

counsel inviting our attention to the impugned order of CIT(A) has

submitted that the assessee in her appeal before the CIT(A) has

ITA Nos. 1411 & 1412/Chd/2017- Smt. Poonam Sidhu, Ludhiana 3

moved an application for furnishing of additional evidence to show

that the husband of the assessee namely Shri Parminder Singh Sidhu

had sold / transferred his land in lieu of which he had received

consideration in cash of Rs. 9,37,000/- on 30.3.2010 out of which

deposits were also made into the bank account of the assessee. The

Ld. CIT(A), however, did not admit the additional evidence

furnished by the assessee on the ground that the assessee was given

a sufficient opportunity to furnish the necessary evidence by the

Assessing officer during the assessment proceedings. The Ld.

Counsel has submitted that since the assessee was not present in

India during the assessment proceedings and further that the

evidences sought to be furnished by the assessee go to root of the

case and, hence, the same are very much necessary to be looked into

for proper adjudication of the matter.

the CIT(A).

contention of the Ld. AR. The Ld. AR has duly explained that the

assessee was not available in India during the assessment

proceedings and that is why the necessary evidences could not be

furnished before the Assessing officer. Further, that the relevant

evidences have been furnished before the CIT(A) but the Ld. CIT(A)

refused to admit the same. In our view, the evidences sought to be

furnished by the assessee go to the root of the case and will have

bearing on the merits of the case. In our view, it will be in the

ITA Nos. 1411 & 1412/Chd/2017- Smt. Poonam Sidhu, Ludhiana 4

interest of justice, if the assessee is given an opportunity to present her case alongwith necessary evidence before the CIT(A). We accordingly set-aside the impugned order of the CIT(A) and direct the CIT(A) to admit the additional evidence regarding the source of

the deposits in the bank account of the assessee and then to examine the same and decide the appeal in accordance with law. The appeal of the assessee is accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

additions. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 01.08.2018

Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 01.08.2018 Rkk Copy to: • The Appellant • The Respondent • The CIT • The CIT(A) • The DR