Sarojben Lalitbhai Vadhani Vs ITO (TAT Ahmedabad)
ITAT Ahmedabad restored the matter back to the file of CIT(A) after imposing cost of Rs. 5,000 on the assessee for negligence in diligently prosecuting the appeal before CIT(A). It is directed that amount is to be deposited in the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund.
Facts- The assessee, an individual, did not file her return of income for AY 2012-13. The case was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act based on information received during a search operation on J.P. Iscon Group, revealing that the assessee had allegedly paid Rs. 46,50,500/- as unaccounted cash (“on-money”) for booking a flat. Despite several notices issued u/s. 142(1) of the Act, the assessee allegedly failed to respond, leading to an ex-parte assessment u/s. 144 of the Act, wherein the AO made an addition of Rs.46,50,500/- u/s. 69A of the Act as unexplained money.
CIT(A) passed ex-parte order confirming addition made by AO. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Conclusion- The addition of Rs.46,50,500/- under Section 69A of the Act was made based on information obtained from the search on J.P. Iscon Group, which indicated that the assessee had paid unaccounted cash for the property. However, the assessee contends that the property was booked by her husband, and she had no role in the transaction. This explanation was not properly examined by the AO or the CIT(A). In light of these circumstances, the addition appears to have been made without fully investigating the assessee’s claims or considering relevant evidence.
