SHANTI DEVI DAGA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-36(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

At the outset, it is noticed that this appeal by assessee is time barred by 53 days and assessee has filed condonation petition supported by medical certificate stating that the assessee is in treatment w.e.f. 27.01.2014 to 19.05.2014 as she was suffering from jaundice which relapsed. The appeal was filed before ITAT on 23.05.2014 whereas order of CIT(A) was communicated to the assessee on 30.01.2014. When this evidence was confronted to Ld. Sr. DR, he opposed the condonation of delay. After going through the facts, I am of the view that there is a reasonable cause exists and hence, delay be condoned and appeal be admitted. Accordingly, I condone the delay and admit the appeal.

The first issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) confirming the action of AO in making addition of gift received from four persons totaling to Rs. 4 lacs u/s. 68 of the Act.

I have heard rival submissions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee drew my attention to the finding of AO which reads as under: “Under the facts and circumstances of the case, it is proved beyond any doubt that the assessee failed to substantiate the identity of the alleged donors their creditworthiness and consequently the genuineness of the transactions. Rather it is found from the bank statements of the alleged donors that the alleged donors accounts were prepared to accommodate ‘entry’ transactions only. In this view of the facts of the case, the amount of Rs.4,00,000/- is treated as unexplained credit in the accounts of the assessee and the same is added back to the total income of thee assessee u/s. 68 of the I. T. Act, 1961. Penalty proceeding u/s. 271(1)(c) has been initiated.” Ld. Counsel for the assessee in view of the above stated that the AO has not at all adjudicated the issue and simply brushed aside everything and made addition. On this, Ld. Counsel for the 2 Shanti Devi Daga AY 2003-04 assessee stated that, the issue be remitted back to the file of the AO. On query from the Bench, Ld. Sr. DR stated that the CIT(A) has adjudicated the issue in detail after examining everything. On this, Ld. Counsel for the assessee in his reply stated that no remand report was asked for and none of the parties were examined by the authorities below. Hence, in the interest of natural justice, this may be restored back to the file of AO. I find from the arguments of both the sides and facts of the case that the AO has passed a cryptic order just brushing aside the argument of the assessee and also the CIT(A) decided the issue without seeking remand report or examining the parties i.e. the donors. In term of the above, I feel that this issue needs reexamination at the level of the AO and accordingly, I set aside the same to the file of AO for fresh adjudication.

The next issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) upholding the addition of estimated gross profit at Rs.60,321/-. At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee has not pressed this and hence, the same is dismissed as not pressed.

The next issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) confirming the action of AO in treating the agricultural income claimed by the assessee as unexplained cash credit to the extent of Rs.2,85,401/-.

I have heard rival submissions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. I find from the assessment order that the AO simply treated the agricultural income as income from other sources to the extent of Rs.2,85,401/- out of total agricultural income of Rs.4,85,401/-. The assessee before us filed the details of agricultural income and also filed sale bill of agricultural produce i.e. in form-J issued by Agricultural Market Committee of Bikaner. The assessee also undertook to file details of land holding before the AO in case the matter is remitted back to him. On query from the Bench, ld. Sr. DR fairly conceded the position. I find from the facts of the case that this issue needs re-examination and the assessee has filed additional evidences before me for the first time in the shape of sale bill issued by Agricultural Market Committee, Bikaner and assessee also intends to file the evidence in respect to land holdings of the assessee. In view of the above, I remit the issue back to the file of the AO and direct him to decide the issue afresh after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

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