2014 (9) TMI 1191 - AT - Income Tax

Assessment u/s 153A - additions made u/s 68, 69, 69C - HELD THAT - The assessee has not been given proper opportunity by the tax authorities. Hence, in the interest of natural justice, we are of the view that all the issues need to be examined afresh. Accordingly, we set aside the orders passed by CIT(A) in all the years under consideration and restore all the issues to the file of the AO with the direction to examine all the issues afresh by duly considering the information and explanations that may be furnished by the assessee and decide them in accordance with the law. The assessee is also direct to extend full co-operation to the assessing officer by furnishing the necessary details that may be called for by the AO. Appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Summary

Issues:
Appeals against orders passed by Ld CIT(A) for assessment years 2004-05 to 2007-08; additions made under sections 68, 69, 69C, and disallowance of expenses; plea for setting aside issues to AO for fresh consideration.

Analysis:
The appeals before the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai were against orders passed by the Ld CIT(A) for assessment years 2004-05 to 2007-08. The assessments were conducted under section 153A of the Income Tax Act post search and seizure operations at the assessee's premises. The assessing officer had made additions under sections 68, 69, 69C, and disallowed certain expenses, which were contested by the assessee. The Ld A.R argued that the assessee was prejudiced as the relevant details were not considered by the authorities, leading to unfavorable orders. The Ld D.R did not object to the plea made by the Ld A.R, indicating acceptance of the need for reconsideration.

The Tribunal considered the nature of additions for each assessment year. For 2004-05, unexplained gifts and deposits were added. In 2005-06, unexplained deposits and foreign tour expenses were contested. Similarly, for 2006-07 and 2007-08, various expenses and foreign tour expenses were disallowed. The Ld A.R admitted the failure to provide necessary details to explain the sources of deposits, cash credits, and expenses, highlighting the inadequacy of explanations provided earlier to the authorities.

In light of the circumstances and to uphold natural justice, the Tribunal decided to set aside the orders of the Ld CIT(A) for all years under consideration. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to re-examine all issues, considering any new information or explanations furnished by the assessee. The assessee was instructed to cooperate fully with the AO by providing the necessary details. Consequently, all appeals filed by the assessee were treated as allowed for statistical purposes, indicating a favorable outcome for the assessee.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision emphasized the importance of providing a fair opportunity to the assessee and ensuring a thorough re-examination of the issues by the Assessing Officer. The judgment aimed to uphold principles of natural justice and proper consideration of all relevant information in tax assessments.