Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK
Before: SHRI N.S SAINI
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-1,
Bhubaneswar, dated 30.9.2016 for the assessment year 2011-12.
The sole grievance of the assessee in this appeal is that the ld CIT(A)
erred in confirming the addition of Rs.16,66,000/- made by the Assessing
Officer as unexplained investment.
I have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of lower
authorities and materials available on record. The brief facts of the case are
2 ITA No. 04/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year :20 11- 12
that the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee has made cash
deposits of Rs.41,68,500/- in Saving Bank account No.909010035424513
maintained in Axis Bank, Jatni. Further, the assessee also made cash
deposits of Rs.21,31,465/- in another Saving Bank account
No.006101525694 maintained in ICICI Bank, Bhubaneswar totaling to
Rs.62,99,965/-. The assessee submitted that he received cash advances
of Rs.10,75,000/- from Dr. Niatyanand Pattnaik and Rs.8,11,000/- from Sri
Umashankar Routray, who happens to be his cousin brothers. He
submitted the confirmations from them. The assessee further submitted
documents wherein, he has been given Power of Attorney by Dr.
Nityananda Pattnaik to sell his property. Out of such sales, he has received
cash of Rs.21,29,130/- and deposited the same in the bank accounts.
Further, he has received salary and house rent in cash at Rs.2,96,500/-.
Further, he also received cash advance of Rs.16,66,000/- from his mother
and uncle who have received such advances for sale of their paternal
properties. The balance amount of Rs.3,22,335/- was stated to have been
received from his mother and uncle for treatment of his wife and as friendly
loan. The Assessing Officer held that the advance of Rs.16,66,000/- from
mother and uncle who have received advances from different parties for
sale of their properties, for which, they have given power of attorney to the
assessee due to old age. The assessee was asked to furnish the name and
address of the persons who have given advance for purchase of property
and the mode of their sources. No evidence whatsoever was furnished and,
3 ITA No. 04/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year :20 11- 12
therefore, the Assessing Officer treated the sum of Rs.16,66,000/- as
undisclosed investment of the assessee.
On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer as
the assessee failed to put in appearance before the CIT(A) on the dates
fixed for hearing i.e. on 13.11.15, 3.12.15, 24.12.15, 15.1.16, 1.7.16,
21.9.16 & 29.9.16.
Before me, ld Authorised Representative of the assessee submitted
that the addition of Rs.16,66,000/- was made as unexplained investment
as the assessee failed to file evidences for sale of property and the name
and address of the persons from whom, the amount was received against
sale of property in the name of his mother and uncle. He filed copy of
agreement to sale dated 4th day of December, 2010 with one Prakash
Kumar Pattnaik and agreement to sale dated 14th of January, 2011 with
Beghanada Sahoo, sale of agreement dated 7th day of November, 2010 with
Alikant Baral and sale of agreement dated 19th day of December, 2010 with
Sishil Kumar Panda and submitted that the addition was made by the
Assessing Officer as the assessee failed to file evidences for sale of
property. He submitted that the evidence is now available with the
assessee, copies of which have been filed before me. Therefore, he prayed
that the matter may be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh
adjudication of the issue after considering the above four sale agreements.
4 ITA No. 04/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year :20 11- 12
Ld Departmental Representative had no objection to the above
submission of ld Authorised Representative of the assessee.
After considering the rival submissions, I am of the considered
opinion that Rs.16,66,000/- was made under the head unexplained
investment u/s.69 of the Act as the assessee failed to file evidence with
regard to sale of property belonging to mother and uncle of the assessee
against which, he received advances, which was deposited in the bank
account of the assessee. Ld Authorised Representative of the assessee has
filed before me the evidences i.e sale agreements and prayed that these
evidences could not be filed before the Assessing Officer as they were not
available with the assessee at the time of assessment proceedings and now
available with the assessee. He submitted that if one more opportunity is
allowed to the assessee to produce the agreements to sale, the assessee
can produce the same before the Assessing Officer to which, ld D.R. had no
objection. In view of above, I am of the considered view that no harm will
be caused to the revenue if one more opportunity is given to the assessee
to produce the same before the Assessing Officer. I, therefore, set aside
the orders of lower authorities and remand the matter back to the file of
the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication of the assessee after
considering the sale agreements filed before him. The assessee is directed
to file agreements to sale as aforesaid before the Assessing Officer as and
when called upon to do so. With these directions, the issue is restored to
the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
5 ITA No. 04/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year :20 11- 12
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical
purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 22/03/2017 in the presence of parties. Sd/- (N.S Saini) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 22/03/2017 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Sri Bhabani Sankar Routray, ,Flat No.307, Aryalaya Apartment, Unit No.-8, Nayapali, Bhubaneswar 2. The Respondent. ITO, Khurda Ward, Khurda 3. The CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar 4. Pr.CIT-1, Bhubaneswar 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack BY ORDER, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, Cuttack