9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 107X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ra, Addl. CIT ORDER N.K. Saini, Vice President 1. This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 18.10.2019 of the ld. CIT(A) Patiala. The following grounds have been raised in this appeal: 1. That the order of Learned Assessing Officer is bad, and against law and facts. 2. That the Learned Assessing Officer has wrongly made addition amounting to ₹ 20.00 Lakhs, without appreciating the fact that the assessee had deposited ₹ 10.00 Lakhs in cash in his bank account. 3. That the Learned Assessing Officer, is not justified in treating the bank deposit as income of the assessee as the deposit was made out of the sale proceeds of agricultural land. 4. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or withdraw any ground of appeal before final hearing. 2. The only grievance of the assessee in this appeal relates to the sustenance of addition of ₹ 20 lacs made by the AO. The facts of the case in brief are that the AO on the basis of information that the assessee had made cash deposits of ₹ 20 lacs with HDFC Bank during the Financial Year 2010-11 relevant to the assessment year under consideration initiated the proc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made an addition of ₹ 20 Lakhs whereas the assessee has deposited cash amounting to ₹ 10,00,000/- only on 18.03.2011 in his HDFC Bank a/c No. 01561000199117. A copy of the bank account is enclosed here with at page 4. 3. It is submitted that as per the provisions of section 144(1), the Assessing Officer, after taking into account all relevant material which the A.O has gathered, shall make the assessment of the total income or loss to the best of his Judgment and determine the sum payable by the assessee on the basis of such assessment. It is a trite law that though there is an element of guess work in a best judgment', it shall not be a wild one but shall have reasonable nexus to the available material and the circumstances of each case. It is submitted that the assessing officer has gathered information that the appellant had deposited ₹ 20 Lakh in HDFC Bank but she has neither taken into account bank statement of the appellant on her record nor verify the cash deposit from the concerned bank to make the assessment of total income of the appellant. Assessment order is not a speaking order as it does not disclose the detail of cash deposits. In this reg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,000 16,77,220 Dayal Singh s/o Narata Singh, village Ramgarh PAN: DHDPS5123P 13.12.2018 55,51,000 32,51,000 Rajinder Kumar s/o Megh Raj v. Allowal PAN: BVHPK5816M A.Y. 2011-12 28.11.2018 26,00,000 3,95,000 Shri Bhan Jindal, Nabha PAN:AIQPJ7871C A.Y. 2011-12 26.12.2018 45,96,831 38,44,015 6. The aforesaid submission of the assessee was forwarded by the ld. CIT(A) to the AO for his comments. In response, the AO submitted as under: Kindly refer to your good-self's letter No. CIT(A)/PTA/2019-20/2398 dated 22.03.2019 on the above subject. 2. AT the outset, it is submitted that as per facts on record, the assessee is maintaining a bank account with HDFC bank during the F.Y. 2010-11, relevant to the A.Y. 2011-12. An information was received on AIR that the assessee during the period under reference has deposited an amount of ₹ 10,00,000/- in his bank account with HDFC Bank. Another information was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1.09.2018. In this notice reference of all the previous notices issued was mentioned and a last opportunity to furnish the return of income for the assessment year under consideration was given. However, no compliance was made. 3.3 Another notice under section 142(1) dated 09.10.2018 was again issued but remained un-complied with. 3.4 Despite non-compliance of notices issued previously, as discussed above, a final show cause notice dated 01.11.2018 was issued and served on the assessee on 02.11.2018. In this notice it was proposed to make an addition of ₹ 20,00,000/- in the absence of requisite clarifications and documents. However, this notice again remained un-complied with. 3.5 Though no further communication was justifiable due to non-compliance on the part of the assessee, but in the interest justice an opportunity as per notice under section 142(1) dated 22.11.2018 was issued fixing the case for 28.11.2018 which was served on the assessee never complied with the notices issued resulting in completion of assessment at the far end of the limitation period, as per order dated 05.12.2018 under section 144 of the IT. Act thereby making an addition of ₹ 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d of the limitation period, as per order dated 05.12.2018 by making addition of ₹ 20,00,000/- as proposed in the show cause notice. Therefore, in the given circumstances, the assessee is not entitled to any relief, as sought for and his request for admission of additional evidence requires no consideration. 6. In this connection, it would not be out of place to mention here that as per provisions of Rule-46A, it is provided that the assessee is not entitled to produce any evidence, at the appellate stage, other than the evidence produced by him during the course of proceedings, before the assessing officer, except in the following circumstances, namely; a) Where the (Assessing Officer) has refused to admit evidence which ought to have been admitted, b) Where he appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from producing the evidence which he was called upon to produce by the (Assessing Officer) or c) Where the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from producing before the assessing officer) any evidence which is relevant to any ground of appeal; or d) Where the (Assessing Officer) has made the order appealed against without giving sufficient opp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of ₹ 10 Lakhs only. The appellant vide his written submissions dated 20.03.2019 contended that the assessing officer did not pass a speaking order as it does not disclose the detail of cash deposited in the bank account. Provisions of section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were referred to wherein it is provided that the Assessing Officer, after taking into account all relevant material which the A.O has gathered, shall make the assessment of the total income or loss to the best of his judgment and determine the sum payable by the assessee on the basis of such assessment . It is submitted that account statement of the appellant is available with the assessing officer which discloses that cash amounting to ₹ 10,00,000/- has been deposited but the learned assessing officer ignored the account statement while making the addition of ₹ 20,00,000/- and has thus violated the provisions of section 144. 2. In the counter comments, the learned assessing officer has confirmed that information regarding cash transaction was received from AIR and CIB and both these sources reveal that the assessee has deposited cash amounting to ₹ 10,00,000/- in his bank account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and notice u/s. 148 was issued after recording the reasons/following the procedure as per law. In response, as per the AO, no return was filed and no compliance was made to the various notices as mentioned in the assessment order. The AO therefore proceeded to complete the assessment u/s. 144 by treating the deposit of ₹ 20 lacs as income of the assessee since the assessee has no explanation to offer about the source of cash which remained unexplained, to be treated as income in the hands of the assessee. The facts of the case, basis of addition made by the AO and the arguments of the AR during the course of appellate proceedings have been considered. The AR as submitted that the AO made addition of ₹ 20 lacs whereas the assessee has deposited cash amounting to ₹ 10 lacs only on 18.03.2011 in his HDFC Bank Account No. 01561000199117. However, it is relevant to mention that nothing has been stated about the source of cash deposit in the submission filed during the appellate proceedings. The AR submitted that no additional evidence are being filed and contended that the bank account statement is already on the record of the Assessing Officer on the basis of wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Registered Deed of the above said plot in favor of ultimate buyer along with translated copy in English. The brief facts of the case are that I am is an agriculturist and had deposited ₹ 10.00 Lakhs in my bank account number 01561000199117 with HDFC Bank. The Learned Assessing Officer had received information, regarding cash transaction, from two sources, i.e. AIR and CIB, and both these sources had revealed that I had deposited cash amounting to ₹ 10.00 Lakhs in my bank account and therefore the Learned Assessing Officer had made an addition of ₹ 20.00 Lakhs in my case. The Learned Assessing Officer had reopened the case to verify the cash deposition of ₹ 20.00 Lakhs whereas I had deposited ₹ 10.00 Lakhs only in my bank account with HDFC Bank. Since I am an agriculturist and is not aware of the proceedings of the Income Tax Act, I had given the notices of income tax to my counsel Advocate Shahi. However, he neither gave any information about the proceedings to me nor demanded any information from me regarding the case. Therefore, the Learned Assessing Officer, completed the assessment ex-parte under the provisions of Section 144 of the Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt in the case of CIT Vs Mukta Metal Works reported at 336 ITR 555. In her rival submissions, the ld. Sr. DR supported the orders of the authorities below and further submitted that the ample opportunities were given by the AO and the ld. CIT(A) but the assessee did not furnish the evidences which were furnished now, therefore, the same may not be admitted. 14. We have heard the submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. In the present case, it is an admitted fact that the assessment was framed by the AO ex-parte u/s. 144 of the Act and the assessee had furnished new evidences which were not available either to the AO or the ld. CIT(A), however, these documents now furnished as additional evidence by the assessee go to the root of the matter, therefore, keeping in view the principles of natural justice, the same are to be admitted. However, as these documents were not before the AO or the ld. CIT(A), we deem it appropriate to set aside this case back to the file of the AO to be adjudicated afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 15. In the result, appeal of the assessee i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
