Theeta Chowdayya Nagarathna Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
Remand Directed as Assessee Was Not Given Proper Opportunity; Cash Deposit During Demonetisation to Be Re-examined
In this appeal, Assessee challenged the order of Addl./JCIT(A)-2, Visakhapatnam, confirming addition of ₹14,32,500/- as unexplained money u/s 69A arising from cash deposits made during the demonetisation period. The limited-scrutiny assessment was completed u/s 143(3) examining cash deposits, wherein AO rejected Assessee’s explanation that deposits were sourced from husband’s agricultural income & an unsecured loan from cousin, solely because supporting documents were not filed. The first appellate authority also dismissed the appeal, observing that Assessee failed to establish the genuineness of sources.
Before Tribunal, it was argued that AO denied adequate opportunity, though time was sought for furnishing evidence. It was further submitted that even the Addl./JCIT(A) issued two notices after six years & passed the order in haste without providing meaningful opportunity. The A.R. produced pahani of 9 acres agricultural land in husband’s name, confirmation of cousin, & bank statements, requesting a final chance to substantiate the claim.
Tribunal observed that Assessee could not properly represent the matter before both authorities. Considering the principles of natural justice, Tribunal held that the issue requires fresh examination. Entire matter was remitted to AO with direction to grant reasonable opportunity to Assessee to submit all documents. Tribunal also cautioned that no leniency shall be given in case of further default. Appeal was thus partly allowed for statistical purposes
