S & N AGROTECH PVT.LTD,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, NASHIK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1316/PUN/2017Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 December 2021AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee was not provided with certain information received by the CIT(A) from the AO. Therefore, the issue was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing the information to the assessee and giving a reasonable opportunity to rebut it.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order confirming an addition made by the AO on account of unexplained cash credit. The issue pertained to share capital and share premium received from shareholders.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition for unexplained cash credit without providing the assessee an opportunity to rebut the information received from the AO.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke
For Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe

आदेश / ORDER

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM :

1.

This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 15-03-2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nashik [„CIT(A)‟] for assessment year 2011-12.

2.

The assessee raised four grounds of appeal amongst which the only issue emanates for consideration is as to whether the CIT(A) is justified in confirming the addition made by the AO on account of unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The issue involved in the appeal is relating to addition made on account of share capital and share premium received from shareholders. The contention of the ld. AR, Shri Kishor Phadke is that the assessee discharged its duty in proving the identity and creditworthiness of the shareholders and genuineness of the transaction. The ld. DR, Shri S.P. Walimbe drew our attention to the information received by the CIT(A) during the First Appellate proceedings form the AO and referred to Page No. 8 of the impugned order. We note that, basing on information received by the CIT(A) held that the assessee failed to prove the genuineness of the transaction and held the said transaction is not genuine. The ld AR submits that the said information as contended by the ld. DR stated to have been received by the CIT(A) could not be provided to the assessee for its rebuttal and argued an opportunity may be given to the assessee to rebut the same with a direction to respondent-revenue to supply the said information to the assessee. The ld. DR did not raise any objection giving an opportunity to the assessee and accordingly, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of ld. AR and ld. DR, we deem it proper to the remand the issue to the file of CIT(A) for its fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) shall furnish the copy of information as received by it from the AO and by giving reasonable opportunity to decide the issue, in accordance with law. The assessee is liberty to file evidences, if any, in support of its claim. Thus, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

4.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 08th December, 2021.

Sd/- Sd/- (Inturi Rama Rao) (S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ऩुणे / Pune; ददनाांक / Dated : 08th December, 2021. RK आदेश की प्रनिलऱपप अग्रेपषि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीऱाथी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The CIT(A)-2, Nashik 4. The Pr. CIT-2, Nashik ववभागीय प्रतततनधध, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, “ए” बेंच, 5. ऩुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. गार्ड फ़ाइऱ / Guard File. 6. //सत्यावऩत प्रतत// True Copy// आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,

तनजी सधचव / Private Secretary, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, ऩुणे / ITAT, Pune

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →