Vimalkumar Prakashchandra Jain Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
Rule 46A Evidence Ignored — ITAT Sends ₹2.47 Cr Capital Addition Back for Fresh Verification
Assessee introduced ₹2.47 crore as capital in the partnership firm M/s Vrundavan Corporation. In reassessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144, the AO treated this capital introduction as unexplained money u/s 69A, mainly because the assessment was completed ex-parte.
Before the CIT(A), Assessee produced detailed evidence, including:
– His personal books,
– Bank statements & cheque details showing funds introduced through banking channels,
– Confirmations, PAN, & ITRs of lenders,
– Ledger accounts of firms from which loans/profits were received.
Assessee also filed additional evidence under Rule 46A. However, CIT(A) passed a non-speaking order, ignored the written submissions, & did not examine or verify the additional documents. He simply upheld the addition on the ground that creditworthiness was not proved.
ITAT observed that both authorities had failed to verify crucial evidence, & CIT(A) had violated principles of natural justice by not considering Rule 46A documents. Since Revenue also did not object to remand, Tribunal held that the matter requires fresh examination.
Held: Order of CIT(A) set aside; matter remanded to AO for fresh adjudication after giving proper opportunity to Assessee.
