9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (9) TMI 246 - AT - Income TaxNotice u/s 148 for reassessment- exparte qua assessee order u/s. 144/147 - addition on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 - reasons to believe - non-cooperation from assessee - non-independent inquiry and verification - Held that - AO in his assessment order held that as the assessment proceedings were getting time barred on 31.12.2008 and in spite of the having been given numerous opportunities, assessee has not furnished any of the details asked vide questionnaire and order sheet entries. In view of aforesaid discussions, we are of the considered view that the assessee remain non-cooperative before the AO and did not file requisite documents before the AO, as asked by him, as a result thereof the AO passed the exparte order u/s. 144/147 of the Act and therefore, did not verify the documents furnished by the Assessee and also not done the independent inquiry and verification. Therefore, Ld.CIT(A) in the interest of justice, think it proper to set aside the issue in dispute to the file of the AO to decide the same afresh, after making independent inquiry and verification, as deem fit. However, the Assessee is also directed to submit all the necessary documents, as asked by the AO during the assessment proceedings and fully cooperate with the AO and did not take any unnecessary adjournment. Accordingly, the issue in dispute is set aside to the file of the AO with the aforesaid directions. Appeal filed by the Revenue stands allowed for statistical purposes.
Issues:
- Addition made under section 68 of the Income Tax Act - Deletion of the addition by the Ld. CIT(A) - Non-appearance of the assessee during the proceedings - Ex-parte order passed by the AO - Lack of verification by the AO Analysis: 1. Addition made under section 68 of the Income Tax Act: The case involved an appeal by the Revenue against the Order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) regarding the addition of a specific amount under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The AO had made an addition of a substantial sum under section 68, considering it as unexplained cash credits. However, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted this addition after finding that the amount had been fully explained by the assessee with supportive evidence and information. The Ld. CIT(A) emphasized the need for the AO to establish the fraudulent nature of the transaction with sound reasoning and evidence before making such additions. 2. Deletion of the addition by the Ld. CIT(A): The Ld. CIT(A) based the deletion of the addition on the fact that the assessee had provided necessary proof to support its claim, and the source of the cash had been fully explained. It was noted that no fresh capital had been introduced, and the sale proceeds of shares had already been shown in the Profit & Loss Account for the relevant assessment year. The Ld. CIT(A) highlighted the importance of the AO conducting a thorough verification process and using the powers available to verify the genuineness of the claim made by the assessee. 3. Non-appearance of the assessee during the proceedings: Despite the notice of hearing sent to the assessee, neither the assessee nor their authorized representative appeared during the proceedings. This non-appearance led to the decision to proceed ex-parte qua assessee. The Tribunal decided the appeal after hearing the Ld. DR and examining the records, including the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 4. Ex-parte order passed by the AO: The AO had passed an ex-parte assessment order under sections 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, stating that the assessee failed to provide a satisfactory explanation regarding the nature and source of the credited amount. The AO did not present direct or inferential evidence to contradict the assessee's contentions and did not conduct a thorough verification process to validate the claim made by the assessee. 5. Lack of verification by the AO: The Tribunal observed that the AO did not utilize the powers available to verify the genuineness of the claim made by the assessee. The AO's failure to conduct an independent inquiry and verification, as well as the non-cooperation of the assessee by not submitting requisite documents, led to the decision to set aside the issue to the AO for fresh consideration. The Tribunal directed the assessee to cooperate fully with the AO and provide all necessary documents for a proper assessment.
|
