2022 (9) TMI 461 - AT - Income Tax

Assessment mentioning the wrong PAN - assessment on attaining the age of majority - assessee was a party of saving bank account in 1981 when he was minor and bank was operated by his father and uncle - HELD THAT - The assessment of the assessee was made after attaining the age of majority in relation to the deposit of cash in bank account. The source of deposit was already accepted by the revenue authority in the hands of father related to assessment order as mentioned above for same bank account. PAN of the assessee was wrongly mentioned including the erroneous name in assessment order. The revenue authority was erred to make addition in the hand of the assessee which was not related at all to assessee. The deposit of cash in the bank is recorded in the books of accounts of M/s. Goni Book Shop Bhaderwah which is related to his father uncle. The two assessments cannot be done under the same PAN. The revenue assessed the assessee under wrong PAN. The entire order of assessing authority is non-est. The assessment order passed by the AO is itself erroneous and liable to be quashed.

Issues:
1. Assessment made in the name of the assessee under the wrong PAN.
2. Addition of cash deposit in the bank account in the assessment order.
3. Appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) regarding the addition amount.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) for the assessment year 2010-11, where the assessment was completed under the wrong PAN of the assessee. The assessee, who had opened a bank account in his minor age with two majors, was wrongly assessed under a different name, leading to an erroneous assessment. The PAN number used in the assessment order belonged to the father of the assessee, and the assessment was based on incorrect information. The Tribunal held that the entire assessment order was infructuous and liable to be quashed due to the error in mentioning the wrong PAN and name.

2. The Assessing Officer (AO) had made an addition to the total income of the assessee based on the cash deposit in the bank account, which was later upheld partially by the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee contended that the deposit of cash in the bank account was related to the business of "M/s. Goni Book Shop Bhaderwah," operated by his father and uncle. The Tribunal noted that the source of the deposit had already been accepted in the hands of the father in a previous assessment order related to the same bank account. Therefore, the addition made in the hands of the assessee was deemed erroneous, as it was not related to the assessee but to the business of the father and uncle. The Tribunal concluded that the assessment order was non-est and liable to be quashed.

3. The assessee, aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A) upholding a partial addition to the income, filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after considering the arguments presented by both parties and examining the documents on record, held in favor of the assessee. The Tribunal found that the assessment made in the name of the assessee under the wrong PAN, and the addition of cash deposit in the bank account were erroneous. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the assessment order was quashed.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, emphasizing the incorrect assessment made under the wrong PAN and the erroneous addition of cash deposit in the bank account, which were found to be unrelated to the assessee but to the business of the father and uncle. The Tribunal declared the assessment order as non-est and quashed it, providing relief to the aggrieved assessee.

← Previous Next →