2014 (1) TMI 1039 - AT - Income Tax

Unexplained cash credit - Held that - The assessee furnished the explanation with regard to cash found from his residence amounting to Rs. 11,72,830 - The sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- was out of the sale of trees in Village Bawal - Regarding the remaining sum of Rs. 1,72,830/-, it has been stated that it was the accumulation of savings of children and the assessee s wife from the cash gift received from parents, relatives on various functions, occasions and festivals - The Ao rejected the claim of the assessee - As he hasnot brought any documentary evidence whatsoever to substantiate his claim regarding sale of trees - With regard to savings of wife and children, again, the assessee s explanation was rejected on the ground that assessee could not substantiate his claim - There was no mention in the assessment order that the Assessing Officer ever asked the assessee and allowed him any opportunity to produce the evidence in this regard - The issue has been restored for fresh adjudication.

Summary

Issues:
1. Addition for unexplained cash found during search
2. Rejection of assessee's claim without allowing opportunity to produce evidence
3. Request to set aside the matter for readjudication

Analysis:
1. The appeals by the assessee were against the orders of the CIT(A)-IX and CIT(A)-XI, concerning the addition of unexplained cash found during a search. The major addition in both appeals was related to cash found at the assessee's residence, with a portion claimed to be from the sale of trees. The Assessing Officer added this amount to block assessment and AY 1998-99 without allowing the assessee an opportunity to substantiate the claim with documentary evidence. The assessee requested the matter to be set aside for the production of additional evidence, including affidavits from buyers of the trees.

2. The learned DR objected to setting aside the matter, stating that the Assessing Officer had already provided adequate opportunity for the assessee to explain the cash found during the search. However, upon review, it was found that the Assessing Officer rejected the assessee's explanations without allowing sufficient opportunity to produce supporting evidence. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had explained the source of the cash found, including savings from family gifts, but the Assessing Officer did not request or allow the submission of documentary evidence to support these claims.

3. Despite the age of the matter, the Tribunal concluded that justice would be served by setting aside the orders of the lower authorities and restoring the case to the Assessing Officer for readjudication. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to provide the assessee with a proper opportunity to be heard and to submit all necessary explanations and evidence. The Assessing Officer was instructed to conduct a fresh assessment for the block period and AY 1998-99 in accordance with the law. As a result, the appeals of the assessee were deemed allowed for statistical purposes.

In conclusion, the judgment highlighted the importance of providing the assessee with a fair opportunity to substantiate their claims with evidence and directed a fresh assessment to be conducted with proper hearings and evidence submission procedures.