SATYANARAYANA GUNUPUTI,BHIMAVARAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJAHMUNDRY

PDF · subscribers
ITA 53/VIZ/2022Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 February 2023AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)6 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, observing that the assessee had filed written submissions with evidence before the CIT(A) which were allegedly not considered, decided to remit the matter back. The CIT(A) was directed to provide another opportunity for the assessee to present their case.

What were the facts?

Following a search operation, the Assessing Officer made additions to the assessee's income for undisclosed receipts and property transfer. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal, confirming these additions.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming additions without considering the assessee's submissions and evidence. Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132,Section 153C,Section 153A,Section 143(1),Section 143(3),Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

Before: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri K.Siva Ram Kumar, AR
Hearing: 23.02.2023

आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member : These appeals are filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], Visakhapatnam-3 in DIN & Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2021-22/1039485030(1) dated 07.02.2022 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18. Since the grounds raised

1.

in these appeals are identical, these appeals are clubbed, heard together and a common order is being passed for the sake of convenience as under. Facts are extracted from I.T.A. 52/Viz/2022.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, engaged in the business of commission on IKP transportation during the A.Y.2017-18 on 30.03.2018 filed his return of income admitting total income of Rs.4,65,000/-. The same was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’). A search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted on 02.11.2017 at the residential premises of Sri Gunuputi Lakshmayya, assessee’s father and various incriminating material was found and seized. Subsequently, notices u/s 153C r.w.s. 153A was issued to the assessee on 21.03.2019 and in response to the notices issued, the assessee filed return of income for the A.Y.2017-18 on 29.03.2019 admitting income at Rs.4,65,000/-. Thereafter notices u/s 143(2), 142(1) and subsequent questionnaire were issued and served on the assessee, in response to which, the assessee furnished relevant information / explanation. After careful examination of the information furnished by the assessee, the Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Act on 27.12.2019 by making additions of Rs.17,55,000/- towards income from other sources and Rs.18,53,704/- towards income from undisclosed gross receipts.

3.

On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee and confirmed the addition made of Rs.17,55,000/- with regard to transfer of property to the assessee, and Rs.18,53,704/- with regard to undisclosed receipts from the transport business, holding that neither there is any material on record nor any submissions made in support of the grounds of appeal with documentary evidence despite several opportunities were accorded to the assessee.

4.

On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal and raised the following grounds of appeal :

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned C.I.T.(Appeals) erred in law and facts in confirming the additions made in the assessment, vide his Order dt.07.02.2022 without considering the appellant’s submissions made on 10.01.2022 in support of his appeal with supporting evidences.

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned C.I.T.(Appeals) erred in law and facts, in confirming the addition of Rs.17,55,000/- representing the value of gift of immovable property by way of a Regd.settlement deed vide Regd.Doc.No.591/2017 dt. 13.02.2017 from his father’s brother, as a taxable gift from non-relative.

3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned C.I.T.(Appeals) erred in law and facts, in confirming the addition of Rs.18,53,704/- representing unreported transport charges paid to the appellant by A.P.State Civil Supplies Corpn (APSCSC), based on a letter given by APSCSC to the learned AO, whereas the said letter doesn’t show any such extra amount of Rs.18,53,704/- paid to the appellant. This fact was further proved by the appellant by way of a letter he obtained from APSCSC and filed in the proceedings before the Ld.CIT(A), which was not considered by him.

4. Your appellant craves leave to add or amend any of the above grounds of appeal

5. With regard to Ground No.1, the Ld.AR submitted that the assessee made submissions on 10.01.2022 in support of his appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), but the Ld.CIT(A) erred in law and facts by confirming the additions made in the assessment without considering the assessee’s submissions. Therefore, the Ld.AR pleaded to set aside the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and afford one more opportunity of being heard before the Ld.CIT(A) to substantiate his claim with evidences.

6. Per contra, the Ld.DR submitted that the assessee was given several opportunities during the assessment / appellate proceedings, but the assessee failed to make submissions either before the AO / Ld.CIT(A) in support of his claim. Therefore, the Ld.DR pleaded to uphold the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the assessee.

7.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is apparent from the paper book filed before us by the Ld.AR , the assessee filed written submissions before the Ld.CIT(A) along with evidences. The Ld.AR contended that the assessee’s submissions were not considered by the Ld.CIT(A) and the additions made by the AO during the assessment proceedings were confirmed arbitrarily. Hence, the Ld.AR pleaded to give one more opportunity of being heard before the Ld.CIT(A) to substantiate his case with supporting evidences. Keeping in view the principles of natural justice, we are inclined to remit the matter back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) with a direction to afford one more opportunity of being heard before the Ld.CIT(A). The assessee is also directed to adhere to the notices issued and furnish relevant information / documents as required by the revenue authorities. Therefore, ground No.1 raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Accordingly, the other grounds need no adjudication for the A.Y.2017-18 and 2018-19.

8.

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 28th February, 2023.

Sd/- Sd/- (एस बालाकृष्णन) (दुव्वूरु आर.एल रेड्डी) (S.BALAKRISHNAN) (DUVVURU RL REDDY) लेखा सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्याधयक सदस्य/JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 28.02.2023 L.Rama, SPS आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. ननधधाऩरती/ The Assessee– Shri Venkata Pavan Kumar Gunuputi, 19-9-3/3, Bank Colony, Near Water Tank, Bhimavaram, West Godavari 2. रधजस्व/The Revenue – Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Rajahmundry 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax (Central), Visakhapatnam 4. नवभधगीय प्रनतनननध, आयकर अपीलीय अनधकरण, नवशधखधपटणम / DR,ITAT, Visakhapatnam 5..गधर्ा फ़धईल / Guard file आदेशधनुसधर / BY ORDER

Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Visakhapatnam

More judgments on Section 132

All 14,598 judgments and leading authorities on Section 132 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →