2012 (12) TMI 213 - HC - Income Tax

Appeal against an order of Tribunal remanding back the matter to AO - held that - An explanation, unless a suitable opportunity is given to verify the same, cannot be treated as a material brought on record. - An explanation pertaining to an entry made by the appellant ought to have had been explained at the time the survey was conducted. -He having had not done so, it was his obligation to explain the same to the Assessing Officer. - He did not do so. - He purported to give explanation before the first Appellate Authority thereby preventing the Assessing Officer to satisfy himself that the explanation is worthwhile. Therefore, the Tribunal was constrained to remit back the matter for re-assessment.

Summary

Issues: Delay in preferring the appeal, Explanation of unexplained entries on seized papers, Remand by Tribunal for re-assessment

Delay in preferring the appeal:
The judgment addresses a two days' delay in preferring the appeal. The court considered the application for condonation of delay and the objection filed, ultimately allowing the application and condoning the delay in preferring the appeal.

Explanation of unexplained entries on seized papers:
The case involves an operation under Section 133 A of the Income Tax Act, where certain papers were seized, including entries by the appellant on Page 172. The appellant explained some entries during the operation but did not explain others. Subsequently, during assessment, no further explanation was provided for the unexplained entries, leading to additions by the Assessing Authority. The Appellate Commissioner accepted explanations provided at the appellate stage, granting relief to the appellant. However, the Tribunal found that explanations should have been given to the Assessing Officer earlier for proper verification. The Tribunal remanded the matter for re-assessment, emphasizing the importance of explanations being provided at the appropriate stages to be considered as valid material on record.

Remand by Tribunal for re-assessment:
The Tribunal's decision to remand the matter for re-assessment was upheld by the High Court. The court found no reason to interfere with the Tribunal's order, ultimately dismissing the appeal. It was established that when all materials are on record, the competent authority must decide the matter without remanding it back. An explanation must be provided at the right time for proper verification, and failing to do so may result in a remand for re-assessment to ensure the Assessing Officer can adequately assess the validity of the explanation provided.

In conclusion, the judgment addresses the delay in preferring the appeal, the importance of providing explanations for entries on seized papers at the appropriate stages of assessment, and the Tribunal's decision to remand the matter for re-assessment to allow for proper verification of explanations. The court upheld the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing the necessity of explanations being timely and valid for consideration in tax assessments.