AMISHA DECOR,MUMBAI V. ACIT, CIRCLE-30(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2549/MUM/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Amisha Decor, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which confirmed the addition of Rs.2.36 crores as unexplained income under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The addition was initially made by the AO due to the assessee's failure to appear and explain the sources of cash deposits in their bank accounts during the assessment proceedings for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessee argued that these deposits were from cash sales and maintained regular books of account, which were not considered by the CIT(A). The ITAT, acknowledging the lack of a proper opportunity for the assessee to explain the deposits, remanded the case back to the AO.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474415 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 05-11-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 24-05-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAM KRISHN KEDIA
• Assessee Lawyers: TARUN GHIA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 144; 68

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “A” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2549/Mum/2024 Assessment Year 2017-18 Amisha Decor, Shop No. 5, Keval Tower, Liberty Garden Road, Malad (W), Mumbai PAN : ABBFA7926P vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle–30(1), 5th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 to C-43, G. Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Tarun Ghia Revenue by : Shri Ram Krishn Kedia, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 05/11/2024 Date of Pronouncement : 05/11/2024 PER B.R. BASKARAN, A.M : The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dt.23-03-2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [„Ld.CIT(A)‟] and it relates to AY. 2017-18. The only issue urged in this appeal is related to the additionof Rs.2.36 crores, being unexplained deposits made into the bank accounts of the assessee. 2. We heard the parties and perused the record. We notice that the assessee did not appear before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings. Hence the AO was constrained to pass the order to the 2 ITA No. 2549/Mum/2024 best of his judgement u/s 144 of the Act. The AO noticed that the assessee made cash deposits into various bank accounts, aggregating to Rs.2,36,30,912/-. Since the assessee did not appear before him to explain the sources of these deposits, the AO assessed the above said amount as „un-explained income‟ u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („the Act‟). 3. Before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee explained that these deposits have been made out of the cash sales. However, the Ld.CIT(A) did not accept the explanations of the assessee and accordingly confirmed the addition made by the AO. 4. Before us, the Ld.ARsubmitted that the assessee maintains regular Books of Account and the deposits into various bank accounts have been made out of cash balance available in the Books of Account. He submitted thatthe AO had issued notices to the assessee on-line and hence, it has escaped the attention of the assessee and hence, he could not furnish the details of sources of deposits before the AO. He submitted that the assessee was ready to furnish various documents, including cash book before the Ld.CIT(A), but the First Appellate Authority (FAA) has refused to take cognizance of the same. Accordingly, the Ld.ARsubmitted that the assessee was not provided proper opportunity to explain the sources of deposits. 5. The Ld.DR, on the contrary, supported the order passed by the tax authorities. 6. Having heard the rival contentions, we notice that the assessee did not get proper opportunity to explain the sources of cash deposits made into his bank account. According to the Ld.AR, the cash deposits have been made out of cash balance available in the Books of 3 ITA No. 2549/Mum/2024 Accountand accordingly he submitted that the sources of deposits could be explained. Under these set of facts, we are of the view that, in the interest of natural justice, the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to explain the sources of cash deposits. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and restore all the issues to the file of AO for examining them afresh, after affording an adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to fully co-operate with the AO for expeditious completion of the assessment. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 05-11-2024 Sd/- Sd/- [RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN] [B.R. BASKARAN] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 05-11-2024 TNMM Copy to : 1) The Appellant 2) The Respondent 3) The CIT concerned 4) The D.R, “A” Bench, Mumbai 5) Guard file By Order Dy./Asst. Registrar I.T.A.T, Mumbai "