IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM SMC BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO , HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 310 / VIZ /201 8 (ASST. YEAR : 20 1 0 - 11 ) KONATHALA JAGANNADHA RAO, C/O K.S.S. SHARMA, CA, D.NO. 12 - 5 - 25A, NEW COLONY, ANAKAPALLE . V S . IT O , WARD - 1, ANAKAPALLE . PAN NO. ADAPK 6018 M (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI K.S.S. SARMA CA . DEPARTMENT BY : SMT. U.MINI CHANDRAN, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 16 / 12 /201 9 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22 / 0 1 /20 20 . O R D E R TH IS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 1 , GUNTUR , DATED 24 /0 4 /201 8 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 1 0 - 11 . 2. FACTS OF THE CASE, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL , FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME BY DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 2,19,849/ - . THE RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS PROCESSED U/SEC. 143(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'A CT') THEREAFTER ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/SEC. 143(3) , 2 ITA NO. 310/VIZ/2018 ( KONATHALA JAGANNADHA RAO ) DATED 28/03/2013 . IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOTED IN RESPECT OF UNDISCLOSED SOURCE OF INCOME AS UNDER: - AGAINST THIS, THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR DERIVED INCOME AS DETAILED BELOW: PROPERTY INCOME (GROSS) RS. 2,48,760 DIVIDENDS RS. 1,62,022 AGRICULTURAL INCOME RS. 73,000 TOTAL RECEIPTS RS. 4,83,782 THUS, THERE IS EXCESS EXPENDITURE TO THE TUNE OF RS. 31,10,118/ - WHICH IS REQUIRE FURTHER CLARIFICATION. WHEN THIS IS PUT TO THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE FILED A LE T TER STATING THAT THE FOLLOWING ARE THE SOURCES FOR THE ALLEGED UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS. 31,10,118/ - 1. OPENING CASH BALANCE RS. 15.81 LAKH S 2. AMOUNT FROM SYAMALADEVI (A.B. DT. 04/02/2010 ) RS. 5.00 LAKHS 3. MARGADARSHI CHIT BID (IOB DT.13/10/2009) RS. 8.24 LAKHS 4. RENT ADVANCE (IOB DT. 20/10/2010 & AB 19/02/2010) RS. 2.00 LAKHS 5. RENTAL INCOME/ DIVIDEND INCOME / AGRICULTURAL INCOME RS. 4.85 LAKHS AS REGARD THE ITEM NO.1 I.E. OP. CASH BALANCE OF RS. 15.81 LAKHS, A VERIFICATION OF THE BALANCE SHEET OF A.Y. 09 - 10 REVEAL THAT THE CLOSING CASH BALANCE IS RS. 2,94,346/ - . CONSIDERING THE ASPECT, THE ALLEGED AVAILABLE CASH BALANCE OF RS. 12,87,385/ - IS TREATED AS ASSESSEES INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES AND ADDED. AS REGARD ITEM NO.2, AMOUNT FROM SYAMALA DEVI, RS. 5 LAKHS, THIS IS VERIFIED AND ACCEPTED. AS REGARDS ITEM NO.3, MARGADARSHI CHIT BID, THE SAME WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 13/10/2009 , THIS IS VERIFIED AND ACCEPTED. AS REGARD ITE M NO.4, RENT ADVANCE OF RS. 2 LAKSH, THIS IS VERIFIED AND ACCEPTED. AS REGARD ITEM NO.5, AMOUNT OF RS. 4.85 LAKSH BEING INCOME FROM RENTS/DIVIDENDS/AGRICULTURE, THE SAME IS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE UNDERSIGNED. HENCE, THIS CANNOT BE AGAIN CONSIDERED AS SOURCE. 3 . ON APPEAL, LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3 ITA NO. 310/VIZ/2018 ( KONATHALA JAGANNADHA RAO ) 4 . ON BEING AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 5. L D. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED A BANK LOAN OF RS. 50.00 LAKHS WHICH WAS NOT SUBMITTED BEFORE TH E ASSESSING OFFICER AND WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A), HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) NOT ACCEPTED THE SAME AND THEREFORE SUBMITTED THAT ISSUE MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 6 . ON THE OTHER HAND, LD.DR STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 7 . THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL RELATES TO UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS. 12, 91 , 982 / - . THE CASE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT SUBSTANTIATED THE SOURCE OF AMOUNT OF RS. 12,91,982/ - , THEREFORE ADDED THE SAME TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY DETAILS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE AMO UNT OF RS. 12,91,982/ - IS A PART OF BANK LOAN RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE IT CANNOT BE TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED SOURCE. HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT ACCEPTED THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. I HAV E GONE TH R OUGH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND FIND THAT HE HAS NOT CLEAR IN HIS ORDER WHY HE HAS NOT ADMITTED THE 4 ITA NO. 310/VIZ/2018 ( KONATHALA JAGANNADHA RAO ) ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND AS TO WHY THE LD. CIT(A) CAME TO A CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALRE A DY WITHDRAWN THE AMOUNT WITHIN A MONTH , THOUGH THE ASSESSEE FILED THE BANK STATEMENT TO SHOW THAT UNSPENT AMOUNT WAS AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE. THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT HE MAY BE PERMITTED TO PRODUCE THE ENTIRE BANK STATEMENT AND THE SAME MAY BE CONSIDERED. KEEPING IN VIE W OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE ISSUE HAS TO BE REMITTED BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER . ACCORDINGLY, I SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD.CIT(A) AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO PASS THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER CONSIDERING THE BANK STATEMENT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO PRODUCE THE BANK STATEMENT BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE DATE IS GIVEN FOR HEARING WITHOUT FAIL. THUS, THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 8 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON TH IS 2 2 N D DAY OF JAN. , 20 20 . S D / - ( V. DURGA RAO ) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 2 2 N D JANUARY , 20 20 . 5 ITA NO. 310/VIZ/2018 ( KONATHALA JAGANNADHA RAO ) VR/ - COPY TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE - KONATHALA JAGANNADHA RAO, C/O K.S.S. SHARMA, CA, D.NO. 12 - 5 - 25A, NEW COLONY, ANAKAPALLE. 2. THE REVENUE - ITO, WARD - 1, ANAKAPALLE. 3. THE PR. CIT - II, VISAKHAPATNAM. 4. THE CIT(A) - 1, GUNTUR. 5. THE D.R . , VISAKHAPATNAM. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER (VUKKEM RAMBABU) SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY, ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM.