ITO Vs Chikkaankandhalli Raithara Seva Sahakara Sanga Niyamitha (ITAT Bangalore)
Tribunal Upholds Acceptance of Additional Documents in Local Language, Rejects AO’s Addition u/s 69A : ITAT Bangalore
Assessee is a co-operative society extending loans to its members. The case was taken up for assessment since large financial transactions were done by assessee. Assessee filed various details including copy of bank statements, computation of income, form 26AS & other documents in local language. In spite of the documents produced, AO did not verify some of the documents for the reason that the same is in local language & treated the cash deposits as unexplained income u/s 69A.
Assessee filed an appeal before the CIT & contended that the cash deposited into the bank are loan amounts repaid by members.
CIT admitted the additional documents after seeking a remand report from AO wherein AO failed to comment on their admissibility. Satisfied with assessee’s documents & contentions, CIT concluded that the deposits were not unexplained money u/s 69A.
Before the Tribunal, the department could not point out any other factual mistakes in the CIT(A) order except saying that the AO was not granted a reasonable opportunity before admitting the additional evidence.
Tribunal ruled in favour of the assessee upholding the CIT(A) order. CIT(A) had sought for the remand report from the AO in order to give the comments on the admissibility of the additional evidences under Rule 46A but unfortunately the AO had not made any comments in the remand report. Tribunal upheld CIT’s decision stating that the AO failed to send remand report. As a result, department’s appeal was dismissed.
