Vijay Odhabhai Lalu Vs ITO (ITAT Surat)
ITAT Surat held that addition on account of cash deposit during demonetization confirmed by both AO and CIT(A) by passing ex-parte order. However, majority of cash deposits are prior to demonetization period. Hence, matter remanded back for fresh verification.
Facts- AO made addition of Rs. 57,22,000/- on account of cash deposit. AO held that the assessee made cash deposit during demonetization period, but factual position is something different. During demonetization period, the assessee has made deposit of Rs. 60,000/- only and rest of the amount deposited by assessee in his three bank accounts i.e. in Surat District Cooperative Bank Ltd., Axis Bank and Varachha Cooperative Bank Ltd. are prior to demonetization period. AO taxed the addition u/s. 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961 at the enhanced rate at 77.25%.
Assessee mainly contested that both AO and CIT(A) passed ex parte orders without giving fair and reasonable opportunity to the assessee.
Conclusion- Held that the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 57,22,000/- by taking view that assessee was asked to submits the source of Cash deposit during demonetisation and the assessee failed to provide source of cash deposits. The Assessing Officer passed assessment order under Section 144 of the Act on 10/12/2019. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of Assessing Officer in an ex parte order. Before us, the ld. AR of the assesse vehemently argued that the assessee may be given one more opportunity. Considering the details of cash deposit filed by the assessee, which shows that the majority of the cash deposits are prior to demonetisation period, which was not available before the Assessing Officer at the time of original assessment, therefore, keeping in view the nature and time of deposit, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer to verify the facts and pass order in accordance with law.
