SANGEETA PANDEY,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-1(4),, LUCKNOW-NEW

The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer (AO) issued notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’), requiring the assessee to file the return of income for the year under consideration. However, the assessee did not file the return of income. The AO issued statutory notices to the assessee, requiring the assessee to furnish various details required for completing the assessment. However, there was no compliance from the side of the assessee. The AO, therefore, proceeded to complete the assessment under section 144 of the Act. Subsequently, he obtained bank account statement of the assessee’s Bank Account No.000910110000417 with Aryawart Gramin Bank, A-2/46, Vijay Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow under section 133(6) of the Act, wherein from he noticed that there were cash deposits to the tune of Rs.33,00,500/- during the year under consideration. The AO treated the cash deposits as unexplained money and added the same to the income of the assessee under section 69A of the Act by invoking the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act. He, accordingly, computed the income of the assessee as under:

Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the NFAC, who dismissed the appeal of the assessee by passing an order ex-parte qua the assessee.

Now, the assessee has approached this Tribunal challenging the action of the AO as well as the NFAC by raising the following grounds of appeal:

Before me, the Ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee (Ld. A.R.) submitted that both the authorities below have passed orders ex-parte qua the assessee, without providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. He further submitted that the assessee had submitted additional evidences before the NFAC, but without admitting the same, they have dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The Ld. A.R. furnished before me the additional evidences in the form of Gift Deed dated 07.07.2011 executed by the assessee’s father-in-law in favour of the assessee, Sale Agreements of properties sold by the assessee’s father-in-law and Bank statement of the assessee’s father-in-law, withdrawing cash of Rs.2,40,000/-. He prayed that the aforesaid additional evidences are crucial for deciding the case of the assessee, therefore, the same may please be admitted under Rule 29 of the I.T.A.T. Rules.

The Ld. Sr. D.R. had no objection to the admission of the additional evidences.

Having gone through the additional evidences filed before me, I am of the view that these evidences go to the very root of the matter and are germane to proper determination/assessment in the case of the Assessee. Accordingly, I admit the same.

The Ld. A.R. further prayed that in the interest of natural justice, the matter may be restored back the file of the AO, where all the aforesaid additional evidences shall be produced to prove the transactions entered into by the Assessee during the year under consideration.

The Ld. Senior D.R. had no objection to the restoration of appeal to the AO.

I have heard the ld. Senior Departmental Representative as well as the ld. AR and have also perused the material on record. Looking into the facts of this case, I am of the considered view that the Assessee deserves one more opportunity to present her case and, therefore, in the interest of substantial justice, I restore this file to the Office of the AO with the direction to provide one more opportunity to the Assessee to present her case. I have already admitted the additional evidences filed by the Assessee in the form of Gift Deed dated 07.07.2011 executed by the assessee’s father-in-law in favour of the assessee, Sale Agreements of properties sold by the assessee’s father-in-law and Bank statement of the assessee’s father-in-law under Rule 29 of the I.T.A.T. Rules. The Assessee shall produce them before the AO during the course of set aside proceedings. I also caution the Assessee to fully comply with the directions of the AO in the set- aside proceedings when called upon to do so, failing which, the AO shall be at complete liberty to pass the order in accordance with law, based on material available on record even if it is ex- parte qua the Assessee.

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.