Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR.
Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE
ORDER Per:Anikesh Banerjee, JM:
The instant appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),NFAC, Delhi, [in brevity the ‘CIT (A)’] bearing appeal No.DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1042898795(1), date of order 29.04.2022, the order passed u/s 250of the Income Tax Act 1961, [in 2 Assessment Year: 2012-13 brevity the Act] for A.Y. 2012-13.The impugned order was emanated from the order of the ld. Income Tax Officer Ward-5(3),Amritsar, (in brevity the AO) order passed u/s 144/147of the Act date of order 23.12.2019. The assessee has taken the following grounds which reads as under: “1. That the ld.CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in framing appeal order ex parte without making any effort to find out the address of the appellant ignoring the fact that the assessee was living abroad and did not get any notice.
2. That the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming the addition made by the AO simply on the basis of information received by him that there has been deposit of Rs.2119900 in the bank without even looking into the bank account statement to ascertain the nature of deposit as well as without giving telescopic effect required to be given for the withdrawals which were utilized for deposit as well as the other sources used by the appellant.
3. That the ld.CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in ignoring the fact that the appellant is an agriculturist having no other source of income except for agriculture income and loans from close relatives and friends as well as advance against sale of agriculture land. Even the source of agriculture income earned was ignored. 3 Assessment Year: 2012-13
4. That the ld.CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in making addition for the cash deposited in the bank and confirmed by CIT(A) without making any trail to find out the source of cash.
5. That the order is bad in law and on facts. 6. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the ground of appeal before the appeal is heard and disposed off.”
Brief fact of the case is that the assessee had deposited cash amount of Rs.21,19,000/- in the bank account of Punjab National Bank for the F.Y.2011-12.
The notice u/s 148 was issued on basis of the AIR Information. The assessee was unable to comply before the ld. AO and entire cash deposit was added with the total income of the assessee. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee had filed the explanation related source of cash deposit from agricultural income. The assessee is permanently staying in outside of India. So, he unable to appear before any of the authorities, for hearing against the notice. The appeal order was passed ex parte and the ld. CIT(A) upheld the order of the ld. AO.
Being aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before us.
The ld. Counsel for the assessee filed written submission with paper book containing page nos. 1 to 17 which are kept in the record. The ld. Counsel 4 Assessment Year: 2012-13 mentioned that the assessee has filed a letter with explanation of source of cash before the ld. AO on dated 04.12.2019. Copy of the letter is enclosed in APB page no. 6. He further argued that in appeal the adjournment was filed and copy of the adjournment screen shots with details reason is annexed in APB page 11 to 13.
The source of cash is from agricultural income and by sale of agricultural land.
Copy of the sale deed in respect of sale of agricultural land is placed by the assessee in APB page nos. 14 to 17.
The ld. Sr. DR only relied on the order of the revenue authorities.
We heard the rival submission and relied on the documents available in the record. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted the explanation related to deposit of cash in bank. The reason for non-appearance before the ld. AO was well explained by the ld. Counsel. The assessee is staying outside India. So, the reasons for non-appearance before the ld. AO is considered. The relevant documents are filed before the Bench but the documents are not submitted before the lower authorities.
In our considered view, we remand back the matter to the ld. AO for further adjudication de novo. The ld. Sr. DR has no objection for remanding the matter back to the AO. Needless to say, the assessee should get a reasonable opportunity 5 Assessment Year: 2012-13 of hearing and should be allowed by the ld. AO to submit the documents in relation to substantiate its claim during hearing. In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing is 7. allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 20.12.2022