2019 (6) TMI 1706 - AT - Income Tax

Loan creditors treated bogus and fictitious transaction - neither the assessee nor the AR filed any written submission before the CIT(A) based on the material available on record CIT(A) dismissed the appeal - Since assessee pleads that the non appearance before the CIT(A) was in connection with his preoccupation with the fire happened in his office and the impugned transactions happened through proper banking channels which could be proved before the lower authorities if due opportunity is given to him which would result in a meritorious decision etc. - HELD THAT - We deem it fit to remit this issue back to the AO for a fresh examination. The assessee shall lay all materials in its support before the AO and comply with his requirements in accordance with law - AO may conduct appropriate inquiry as deemed fit however he shall furnish adequate opportunity to the assessee if any material is likely to be used against him and then pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) order for assessment year 2014-15 regarding addition of loan creditors, unexplained unsecured loans, unexplained creditors, and unexplained unsecured loan.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed by an individual assessee against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) order for the assessment year 2014-15. The Assessing Officer added various amounts to the assessee's income, including loan creditors, unexplained unsecured loans, and unexplained creditors. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dismissed the appeal as neither the assessee nor the authorized representative filed any written submission. The authorized representative later explained that their office had caught fire, preventing them from appearing before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). It was argued that all transactions were made through proper banking channels and the assessee's creditworthiness should not be doubted. The Departmental Representative supported the lower authorities' orders.

The Appellate Tribunal, after hearing the submissions, decided to remit the issue back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh examination. The Authorized Representative's explanation for non-appearance was considered valid, and it was noted that the transactions were made through proper banking channels. The Tribunal directed the assessee to provide all necessary materials to the Assessing Officer and comply with requirements. The Assessing Officer was instructed to conduct an appropriate inquiry, provide adequate opportunity to the assessee if any material was to be used against them, and then pass orders in accordance with the law. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, and the order was pronounced in an open court in Chennai on 20th June 2019.