Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “RAJKOT” BENCH, RAJKOT
Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED&
O R D E R
PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM:
The instant appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order dated 28.01.2020 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Rajkot-2 (in short ‘CIT(A)’) arising out of the assessment order dated 28.11.2018 passed by the ITO, Ward-2(1)(4), Rajkot under Section 143 (Shri Harkishan V. Jivrajani vs. ITO) A. Y. 2011-12 - 2- r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2011-12.
The addition of Rs.19,27,770/- on account of unexplained cash deposit in the bank account of the assessee is the subject matter before us which was added by the Ld. AO. In spite of service of notices including show cause dated 16.11.2018, none appeared before the Ld. AO and having no other alternative it was presumed that assessee did not have anything to say and the Ld. AO had proceeded with the matter and finally made impugned addition of Rs.19,27,770/- in the hands of the assessee on account of unexplained cash deposit in the bank account by the assessee.
Before the First Appellate Authority, the Ld. CIT(A) issued several notices which is mentioned in the order impugned itself. In spite of 12 opportunities granted to the assessee, since none appeared on behalf of the assessee neither any written submissions was filed, the Ld. CIT(A) proceeded with the matter and granted part relief to the assessee by deleting addition of Rs.1,50,250/- in the manner as follows:
“Thus, assessee do not avail any such opportunity of being heard or do not furnishes any written submission accordingly the appeal is decided based on facts narrated and grounds of appeal raised in the appeal memo. The AO has given finding that assessee was issued notice under section 148 by recording reasons in writing. The copy of the reasons recorded were also made available to the assessee. And assessee was issued letter dated 30/10/2018 along with notice under section 143(2) of the Action dated 30/10/2018. The assessee has responded to such notice and submitted details which were verified by the assessing officer. Assessing Officer did not accept assessee explanation and made addition of Rs 19,27,770/- as unexplained cash credit in the bank account. The AO has also given finding that assessee is doing retail trading of plastic item and received the payment in small amount of cash and he has further giving finding that assessee contends from such small transaction cash deposit in bank has been made when (Shri Harkishan V. Jivrajani vs. ITO) A. Y. 2011-12 - 3- amount surplus after withdrawal from the bank. Thus, there is no material AO placed on record this regarding some cash generation from retail trading of plastic item. Though during appeal proceeding the appellant has not appear before the appellate authority. However, the facts of the assessee's retail business cannot be ignored. Assessing Officer has given clear cut finding that assessee had opening amounting to Rs.1,50,250/- and had some generation of cash from retail trading of plastic item. Thus, Assessing Officer treating entire cash credit as unexplained do not sounds judicial. Accordingly, I direct Assessing Officer to give credit for opening cash of Rs.1,50,250/- and balance of Rs. 17,77,520/-(19,27,770-1,50,250) is held as unexplained under the Income Tax Act. The appellant ground on this issue is accordingly partly allowed. The ground of appeal on the issue of charging of interest under the various provision of the act the appellant contended that in the appeal memo that the AO has add in charging the same therefore same reserves to be deleted. The appellant contention as raised is carefully considered however, charging of interest under the provision of the act is mandatory under section 234A, 234B and 234C. Therefore, the appellant ground on this account is dismissed.
5. In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.”
4. Today at the time of call, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. It also appears from the records that on very many occasions in the past, the assessee did not appear and in some of the occasions sought for adjournment. We, therefore, decided to proceed with the matter and we also heard the Ld. DR who in fact supported the orders passed by the authorities below.
5. Upon perusal of the order passed by the authorities below, it appears that the assessee is having a retails business and the Ld. AO has made an observation that the assessee had opening amount of Rs.1,50,250/- and also had some generation of cash from retail trading of plastic item. In that view of the matter, the Ld. AO’s observation that entire cash credit was unexplained was not found acceptable and accordingly relief to the tune of Rs.1,50,250/- was given to the assessee. The other component stood confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A). In the absence of any assistance rendered by the assessee, we do not (Shri Harkishan V. Jivrajani vs. ITO) A. Y. 2011-12 - 4- find any reason to interfere with such order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) which is found to be reasoned one. The order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is, thus, confirmed. Assessee’s appeal is found to be devoid of any merit and dismissed.
In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed.
This Order pronounced on 30/08/2023
Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 30/08/2023 S. K. SINHA True Copy आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से,