PRABODH RANJAN DEY ,MUMBAI V. ITO WARD 28(2)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 6658/MUM/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Mr. Prabodh Ranjan Dey, the Assessee, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which upheld the addition of Rs. 24,60,000 as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2012-13. The Assessing Officer had initially made this addition based on cash deposits observed in the Assessee's bank account, which the Assessee failed to adequately explain despite multiple notices. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) also found the Assessee's explanations insufficient, leading to the appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal noted that the Assessee had provided some relevant details that were not considered by the Commissioner and thus remanded the case for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 313073 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ KUMAR SINHA; LD.
• Assessee Lawyers: SANKRITI DWIVEDI; LD
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.6658/M/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Mr. Prabodh Ranjan Dey, C/o. Dwivedi & Associates, Room No.406, 4th Floor, 34F, Maharshi Devendra Road, Kolkata West Bengal – 700 006 PAN: AJUPD6408L Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 28(2)(4), Room 309, 3rd Floor, Tower No.6, Vashi Railway Station Commercial Bldg., Vashi, Navi Mumbai Maharashtra - 400073 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Ms. Sankriti Dwivedi, Ld. A.R. (virtually appeared) Revenue by : Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Ld. Sr.D.R. Date of Hearing : 07.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 28.04.p2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member: This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 30.08.2024, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2012-13. 2. In the instant case, as per the CIB data, it was observed by the Assessing Officer (AO) that the Assessee had deposited cash of Rs.24,60,000/- in saving bank account maintained with State Bank of India during the year under consideration and therefore he, by issuing statutory notices asked the Assessee to provide the details, ITA No.6658/M/2024 Mr. Prabodh Ranjan Dey 2 however, the Assessee failed to provide any detail and made no compliance in any of the notices. Consequently, the AO, ultimately made the addition of Rs.24,60,000/- u/s 69A of the Act as unexplained money. 3. The Assessee, being aggrieved, challenged the said addition before the Ld. Commissioner, however, as per impugned order, only submitted the ledger of the different heads for the period 01.04.2011 till 31.03.2012, but not any single material evidence, corroborating the ledger entries. The Assessee has also not submitted any proof regarding business activities and supporting bills/invoices in support of sales and purchase entries mentioned in the ledger. And therefore the Ld. Commissioner ultimately upheld the aforesaid addition on finding no reason to accept the claim of the Assessee as genuine explanation to the cash deposits under consideration. 4. The Assessee, being aggrieved, in appeal before this Tribunal. 5. Heard the parties and given thoughtful considerations to rival claims of the parties and peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. It appears from para no.4 of the impugned order that the Assessee furnished copy of books of account, balance sheet, profit & loss account and computation of income for the year under consideration. Further, the Assessee also submitted that the Assessee craves leave to furnish further details, if any required with regard to the passing of order in this case. However, the Ld. Commissioner by holding that not a single material evidence corroborating ledger entries and proof regarding business activities and supporting bills/invoices qua sale and purchase entries, filed by the Assessee, whereas from para no.4 it appears that the Assessee filed the relevant details which have not been considered by the Ld. Commissioner. Therefore, considering the peculiar facts and ITA No.6658/M/2024 Mr. Prabodh Ranjan Dey 3 circumstances, for the just and proper decision of the case and substantial justice, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order and consequently remanding the instant case to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, suffice to say by affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. Thus, the case is remanded to the file of the Ld. Commissioner accordingly. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 28.04.2025. Sd/- (NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY) JUDICIAL MEMBER * Kishore, Sr. P.S. Copy to: The Appellant The Respondent The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai The DR Concerned Bench //True Copy// By Order Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai. "