Sri Suresh Kumar , Bellary V. Income Tax Officer Ward-2 , Bellary

ITA 3446/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5176 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-04-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 30-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3446/Bang/2018 Assessment year: 2013-14 Shri Suresh Kumar, H.No.166, Ward No.22, Main Road, Cowl Bazar, Bellary – 583 102. PAN: ANGPS 3443N Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2, Bellary. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 30.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 06.04.2022 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.10.2018 of the CIT(Appeals), Gulbarga for the assessment year 2013-14. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing. However, we proceed to dispose of the appeal after hearing the ld. DR. 3. The assessee has raised as many as 16 grounds in this appeal. However, ground No.2 is that the assessment order was passed in a hurried manner without giving proper opportunity to the assessee. Admittedly, in this case, the AO made an addition of Rs.99.78 lakhs ITA No.3446/Bang/2018 Page 2 of 2 towards the loan creditors. Though it was admitted by the assessee at the time of survey, later it was retracted and stated that these loans are availed from Federal Bank and unsecured loans. The AO was of the opinion that loans were created for the sources which were repaid before the date of survey or obtained after the date of survey and the explanation given by the assessee was an after-thought to retract the income offered in the survey. Accordingly, he made the addition of Rs.99.78 lakhs. The CIT(Appeals) confirmed the order of the AO. 4. In our opinion, in the interest of justice, it is appropriate to give one more opportunity to the assessee to explain the loan creditors. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(Appeals) and remit the issue in dispute to the Assessing Officer for fresh decision, after giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee to explain these loans. 5. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court on this 6 th day of April, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- ( BEENA PILLAI ) ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Bangalore, Dated, the 6 th April, 2022. /Desai S Murthy / Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Bangalore. By order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Bangalore.