SRI BHABANI SANKAR ROUTRAY,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, KHURDA WARD, KHURDA

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.

erred in confirming the addition of Rs.16,66,000/- made by the Assessing

Officer as unexplained investment.

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.

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.

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

submission of ld Authorised Representative of the assessee.

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

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