Kumaralayam Properties (P) Limited, CHENNAI V. DCIT Central Circle 3(2), CHENNAI

ITA 965/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1471 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-05-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 08-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Additional evidence
• Section: 147; 68; 143(3)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ यायपीठ, चे ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI ी महावीर सह, उपा य एवं ी िगरीश अ वाल, लेखा सद य के सम BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 965/CHNY/2019 िनधा रण वष /Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/s. Kumaralayam Properties (P) Ltd., No. 41/2B, 2 nd Floor, Royal Court Venkatanarayana Road, Chennai – 600 017. PAN: AACCK-4608-F v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(2), Chennai. (अ पीलाथ /Appellant) ( यथ /Respondent) अपीलाथ क ओर से/Appellant by : Shri. K. Meenakshi Sundaram, ITP यथ क ओर से/Respondent by : Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT सुनवाई क तारीख/Date of Hearing : 24.05.2022 घोषणा क तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 24.05.2022 आदेश आदेशआदेश आदेश /O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) -19, Chennai in ITA No. 436/17-18 dated 25.02.2019 against the order of ACIT, Central Circle 3(2), Chennai passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (herein after referred to as “the Act”) dated 29.12.2017. 2 M/s. Kumaralayam Properties (P) Ltd, ITA No. 965/Chny/2019 AY: 2010-11 2. The assessee has taken several grounds of appeal an law and facts which essentially relate to challenging the validity of reopening of assessment u/s. 147 of the Act, addition made in respect of deposit of cash in banks of Rs. 36,56,000/- treated as unexplained credits u/s. 68 of the Act, addition of Rs. 16,20,500/- towards sundry creditors by treating them as unexplained credits u/s. 68 of the Act and Rs. 31,00,000/- in respect of unsecured loans. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income on 31.03.2012 reporting a total income of Rs. 2,91,580/-. In the course of assessment proceedings, Ld. AO noted that assessee holds bank accounts in various banks and tabulated the details of cash in the bank accounts of the assessee with Corporation Bank, T.Nagar, Chennai. There were further deposits in other banks of HDFC Bank which were also tabulated by the Ld. AO. Ld. AO sought details in support of source of income with the deposits of cash made in the bank accounts of the assessee. The ld. AO further sought details in respect of unsecured loans of Rs. 31,00,000/-. In the course of assessment, Ld. AO compared the balance of sundry creditors of the current year with the preceding year and considered the difference of Rs. 16,20,500/-, for the purpose of making addition asking the assessee to furnish the details in this regard. Ld. AO, proceeded to complete the assessment by making the addition of Rs. 36,56,000/- in 3 M/s. Kumaralayam Properties (P) Ltd, ITA No. 965/Chny/2019 AY: 2010-11 respect of deposit of cash in bank accounts, unsecured loan of Rs. 31,00,000/- and sundry creditors of Rs. 16,20,000/-. Aggrieved, the assessee went into appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved, the asssessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. At the outset, Ld. Counsel of the assessee Shri. K. Meenakshi Sundaram, ITP, prayed and requested the bench for remitting the matter back to the file of the Ld. AO by making an assurance that all the details and records shall be furnished for proper verification and examination in respect of the claims made by the assessee, since reasonable opportunity was not given. This submissions of the ld. Counsel was confronted to the Ld. Sr. DR who did not controvert the same. 5. We have heard the contentions of both the parties and perused the material on record. From the perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A), we note that he has observed that appellant has not produced the books of accounts and has not offered proper explanation. In the light of the fact that assesse could not produce books of accounts and detailed explanation in respect of the additions made by ld. AO, Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the addition and has dismissed the appeal. 4 M/s. Kumaralayam Properties (P) Ltd, ITA No. 965/Chny/2019 AY: 2010-11 6. In the interest of justice, fair play and good conscience and also considering the prayer made by the Ld. Counsel along with assurance given before us of making all the submissions as and when required before the ld. AO if the matter is remitted back to the file of the AO, we find it proper to consider the prayer so made and remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. AO for fresh adjudication in the light of assurance given by the Ld. Counsel of making all the compliances as and when called by the Ld. AO. We direct the assessee to comply with all the requirements as and when called by Ld AO and be diligent in making all its submissions including any additional evidences required to be furnished in support of the claims made by the assessee. We also direct the Ld. AO to consider the submissions made by the assessee meritoriously and pass a speaking order. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 24 th May, 2022 at Chennai. Sd/- (म हावीर सह ) (MAHAVIR SINGH) उपा य /VICE PRESIDENT Sd/- (िगरीश अ वाल) (GIRISH AGRAWAL) लेखा सद!य /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे#ई/Chennai, %दनांक/Dated, the 24 th May, 2022 JPV JPVJPV JPV आदेश क ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. यथ /Respondent 3. आयकर आयु (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयु /CIT 5. िवभाग ीय ितिनिध/DR 6. गाड फाईल/GF.