Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Dr. BR Ambedkar Jain Kalyan Swayam Sahayata Samiti Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
Appeal Number : ITA No. 5903/Del/2019
Date of Judgement/Order : 08/09/2022
Related Assessment Year : 2009-10
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Dr. BR Ambedkar Jain Kalyan Swayam Sahayata Samiti Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)

Undisputedly, in course of assessment proceeding the assessee went unrepresented, for whatever may the reason. Therefore, the assessee did not get any opportunity to explain the source of cash deposits made in the bank account with supporting evidence. However, before learned first appellate authority, the assessee not only explained the source of cash deposits to be out of cash receipts from members for specific purpose but also furnished additional evidences to substantiate such claim. It is evident, learned Commissioner (Appeals) refused to accept the additional evidences on the ground that the assessee failed to explain, why the evidences could not be furnished before the Assessing Officer. This reasoning, in my view, is unsustainable. When the assessee remained unrepresented in the assessment proceeding and assessment order was passed ex-parte, the assessee could not have produced the evidences before the Assessing Officer. Therefore, at the stage of first appellate proceeding only, the assessee got an opportunity to explain the source and furnish supporting evidence. That being the case, learned Commissioner (Appeals) should have admitted the evidences and examined them on their own merits before deciding the issue. This is so because, the evidences furnished by the assessee can have a crucial bearing on disputed addition. Leaned counsel appearing for the assessee has brought to my notice that accepting identical explanation submitted by the assessee with supporting evidence, the Assessing Officer has accepted cash deposits made in the bank account while completing assessments for assessment year 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13. He has also drawn my attention to the aforesaid assessment orders.

In view of the aforesaid, I am inclined to restore the issue relating to the disputed addition to the file of the Assessing Officer for examining afresh after considering the evidences furnished by the assessee before learned first appellate authority and any other evidence, which the assessee may furnish in course of the proceeding. I further direct, while examining the issue, the Assessing Officer must also verify the assessment orders passed for assessment years 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13, wherein, similar cash deposits were stated to have been accepted and accordingly decide the issue. Grounds are allowed for statistical purposes.

FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI

This is an appeal by the assessee against order dated 23.08.2018 of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ghaziabad, pertaining to assessment year 2009-10.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031