SHWETA VISHAL AVANKHEDKAR, GOREGAON V. ASSESSING AUTHORITY, DELHI

ITA 1412/MUM/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0228 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 18-10-2022
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 26-05-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 68; 133(6)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1412/Mum/ 2022 (Asse ssment Year :2014-15) Shweta Vishal Avankhedkar Goregaon GR. Floor, Block No. 97/774, GR.Near Om Sai Nath Hotel, RD No.1 Floor, Motilal Nagar, Best Colony, Goregaon (West)- 400104 Vs. Assessing Authority Delhi National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi PAN/GIR No.AJRPA0092J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by None Revenue by Shri. Kiran Unavekar Date of Hearing 19/10/2022 Date of Pronouncement 19/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): This appeal in ITA No. 1412/Mum/2022 for A.Y.2014-15 arises out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) in appeal No.CIT(A)42, Mumbai/10049/2017-18 dated 21/03/2022 (ld. CIT(A) in short) against the order of assessment passed u/s.143(3)of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 13/12/2016 by the ld. Income-Tax officer -31(3)(4) (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO). ITA No. 1412/Mum/2022 Shweta Vishal Avankhedkar, Goregaon 2 2.None appeared behalf of the assessee. In fact the notice send to the assessee in the address mentioned in form 36 had returned unserved with the noting that addressee has moved from the said address. Hence, we proceed to dispose of this appeal on hearing the ld.DR and based on the materials available on record. 3.The Ground No. 1 raised by the assessee is challenging the exparte order passed by the ld.CIT(A). But on perusal of the order of ld.CIT(A), we find that the ld.CIT(A) had granted 7 opportunities to the assessee on various dates which are listed in Para 4 of his order. The assessee did not bother to avail those opportunities before the ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, ld.CIT(A) had proceeded to dispose of this appeal on merits and based on materials available on record. Hence, the Ground No 1 raised by the assessee is hereby dismissed. 3.The only surviving issue to be decided in this appeal is as whether the ld.CIT(A) was justified in upholding the addition made in respect of cash deposits made in the regular bank account of the assessee in the sum of Rs. 19,37,000 in the facts of circumstances of the instant case. 4.We heard ld.DR and perused the materials available on record. We find that assessee is an individual receiving remuneration from M/s. Ele one Engineers. The assessee had filed her return of income for the A.Y. 2014- 15 on 17/12/2014 declaring total income of Rs. 2,42,500/-. The ld.AO on verification of AIR/ITS information found that there were cash deposits of Rs. 19,37,000 in SBI Varsova branch bank account of the assessee. The said AIR information was handed over to the authorized representative of the assessee by the ld.AO during the course of hearing on 18/7/2016. The assessee was show caused as to why the cash deposits made in the sum of Rs. 19,37,000 be not treated as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of ITA No. 1412/Mum/2022 Shweta Vishal Avankhedkar, Goregaon 3 the Act. The assessee furnished the copy of her Income-tax return together with the computation of Income for A.Y.2014-15; confirmed the bank account no. 30233492040 maintained with State Bank Of India Varsovo Branch as belonging to her and also confirmed the fact that there were cash deposits of Rs. 19,37,000 made in the state bank account during the year under consideration, before the ld.AO. 6.The ld.AO called for the copy of bank statements from the assessee together with certain documents which were not furnished by the assessee. Since, no explanation was forth coming from the assessee with regard to explaining the sources of cash deposits in the said SBI bank account, the ld.AO proceeded to add the same as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act and completed the assessment. 6.1. The ld.CIT(A) noted that ld.AO issued notice u/s 133(6) of the Act to SBI bank Manager Varsova Branch on 3/10/2016 calling for the bank statements for the whole year, which was not complied with, by the bank. Even before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee could not explain the source for the cash deposits made in the bank account. Accordingly, the ld.CIT(A) upheld action of the ld.AO. 7.Before us, the assessee had raised the ground that the cash deposits were made out of cash withdrawals made from the bank account. Unfortunately, there is no assistance from the side of the assessee before us to verify this fact. Since the only income owned by the assessee is remuneration from M/s. Ele one Engineers as stated in Para of 3 Assessment Order, we deem it and appropriate to remand this appeal to the file of ld.AO for denovo adjudication of this issue in accordance with law as last and final opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is directed to furnish the entire bank statements before the ld.AO and also cash ITA No. 1412/Mum/2022 Shweta Vishal Avankhedkar, Goregaon 4 account before the ld.AO. The assessee is also is liberty to furnish further evidences, if any, to justify her contentions. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 10.In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 19/10/2022 by way of proper mentioning in the notice board. Sd/- (M.BALAGANESH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 19/10/2022 KARUNA, sr.ps Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Sr. Private Secretary / Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), Mumbai. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard file. //True Copy//