AMBADAS HARIBA TAD (HUF), Solapur V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Pandharpur, Pandharpur

ITA 241/PUN/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Ambadas Hariba Tad (HUF), who appealed against the order of the NFAC, which had upheld an assessment order by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Pandharpur. The assessment order included a significant addition to the appellant's income, which was attributed to unexplained cash deposits in a bank account. The appellant contended that these deposits were proceeds from the sale of pomegranates, supported by additional evidence during the NFAC proceedings. However, the NFAC found the additional evidence insufficiently detailed to verify the claims. The Tribunal found that the NFAC should have sought a remand report from the Assessing Officer regarding the additional evidence and thus remanded the matter back to the NFAC for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 137627 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-03-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 23-03-2023
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 27-02-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.241/PUN/2023 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Ambadas Hariba Tad (HUF), A/p. Khardi, Tal- Pandharpur, Dist.- Solapur- 413304. PAN : AAOHA6831M Vs. ITO, Ward-1, Pandharpur. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘NFAC’] dated 11.01.2023 for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is HUF deriving income from agricultural. The Return of Income for the assessment year 2014-15 filed on 15.12.2014 declaring total income of Rs.14,96,040/-. Against the said return of income, the Assessee by : Shri D. G. Kurundwadkar Revenue by : Shri Suhas Kulkarni Date of hearing : 24.03.2023 Date of pronouncement : 27.03.2023 ITA No.241/PUN/2023 2 assessment was completed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Pandharpur (‘the Assessing Officer’) vide order dated 30.12.2016 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) at a total income of Rs.42,26,700/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer made addition of cash deposited in the bank account on 03.04.2013 at Rs.22,75,510/- by disbelieving the explanation of the appellant that the source of such deposit represents sale proceeds of Pomegranates received from one Shri Nissar Shaikh. The Assessing Officer had disbelieved the explanation tendered in support of the source of cash deposit, as the assessee had not produced the bill from the said Shri Nissar Shaikh. 3. Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, an appeal was filed before the NFAC. During the course of proceedings before the NFAC, the appellant had filed confirmation letters as well as bill from the said Shri Nissar Shaikh in the form of additional evidence. The NFAC, on consideration of such evidence, concluded that these confirmation letters are without mentioning any identity, PAN, date- wise purchase transactions, sale bill reference, source of such huge cash etc. Based on these findings, the NFAC concluded that these documents are not reliable and valid documents. ITA No.241/PUN/2023 3 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 5. I have carefully gone through the rival submissions and perused the material on record. I find that when the appellant had filed the additional evidence before the NFAC, it cannot be rejected on mere surmises and conjectures without enquiring into its genuineness. The NFAC should have called for the remand report from the Assessing Officer on the additional evidence/information submitted by the appellant before him, which the NFAC had failed to do so in the present case. Accordingly, I remand the matter back to the file of the NFAC to decide the issue in appeal afresh after considering the additional evidence filed before him in conformity with the Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 27 th day of March, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 27 th March, 2023. Sujeet ITA No.241/PUN/2023 4 आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 5. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.