SANGEETA PANDEY,LUCKNOW V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-1(4), LUCKNOW-NEW

ITA 564/LKW/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Sangeeta Pandey against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), which had dismissed her appeal ex-parte. The original assessment by the AO for the Assessment Year 2012-13 included unexplained cash deposits amounting to Rs.33,00,500, treated as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and added to the assessee's income. The ITAT found that the additional evidences submitted by the assessee were vital for a fair assessment and thus restored the matter to the AO for re-assessment, allowing the assessee to present her case with the new evidence.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471113 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 02-12-2024
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 13-09-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJEEV KRISHNA SHARMA; SANJEEV KRISHNA SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: VIVEK TIWARI; PASSING AN; VIVEK TIWARI; PASSING AN
• Keywords: Set aside; Additional evidence; Reasonable cause; Gift; Assessment record
• Section: 148; 144; 133(6); 69A; 6

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.564/LKW/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sangeeta Pandey House No.88, Majra Andandlok-II Ganeshpur, Rashmanpur Chinhat, Lucknow v. The Income Tax Officer Ward 1(4) Lucknow - New TAN/PAN:BQEPP1354H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Vivek Tiwari, C.A. Respondent by: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date of hearing: 02 12 2024 Date of pronouncement: 04 12 2024 O R D E R This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 16.07.2024, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer (AO) issued notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’), requiring the assessee to file the return of income for the year under consideration. However, the assessee did not file the return of income. The AO issued statutory notices to the assessee, requiring the assessee to furnish various details required for completing the assessment. However, there was no compliance from the side of the assessee. The AO, therefore, proceeded to complete the assessment under ITA No.564/LKW/2024 Page 2 of 6 section 144 of the Act. Subsequently, he obtained bank account statement of the assessee’s Bank Account No.000910110000417 with Aryawart Gramin Bank, A-2/46, Vijay Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow under section 133(6) of the Act, wherein from he noticed that there were cash deposits to the tune of Rs.33,00,500/- during the year under consideration. The AO treated the cash deposits as unexplained money and added the same to the income of the assessee under section 69A of the Act by invoking the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act. He, accordingly, computed the income of the assessee as under: Returned income (No ITR filed) : Nil Addition u/s.69A : Rs.33,00,500.00 Addition of Interest Income : Rs.45,807.00 Assessed Income : Rs.33,46,307.00 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the NFAC, who dismissed the appeal of the assessee by passing an order ex-parte qua the assessee. 4. Now, the assessee has approached this Tribunal challenging the action of the AO as well as the NFAC by raising the following grounds of appeal: 1.0 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in not admitting the additional evidence ITA No.564/LKW/2024 Page 3 of 6 u/r.46A, though such documents goes to the root of the case and there exist reasonable cause for not furnishing the documents on assessment record; 2.0 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in not considering the bonafide reasons that had precluded the appellant to furnish the details/documents on assessment record and further erred in not deciding the appeal on merits; 3.0 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made u/s.69A r.w.s 115BBE of cash deposits made in bank account of Rs.33,00,500/-; 4.0 The Ld. CIT(A), before confirming the addition u/s.69A of Rs.33,00,500/-, erred in not considering the understated vital facts, being; a) The source of cash deposits of Rs.13,00,000/- made on 12/03/2012 is out of cash withdrawal made from same bank account on same day of same amount; b) The balance cash deposits if Rs.20,00,000/- is sourced out of gift received from deceased father on contemplation of death, being sourced out of sale of residential plot; c) The Ld. AO ought to have conducted some enquiries on issuing the notice u/s. 133(6) to the bank and verified the source of cash deposits. 5. Before me, the Ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee (Ld. A.R.) submitted that both the authorities below have passed orders ex-parte qua the assessee, without providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. He further ITA No.564/LKW/2024 Page 4 of 6 submitted that the assessee had submitted additional evidences before the NFAC, but without admitting the same, they have dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The Ld. A.R. furnished before me the additional evidences in the form of Gift Deed dated 07.07.2011 executed by the assessee’s father-in-law in favour of the assessee, Sale Agreements of properties sold by the assessee’s father-in-law and Bank statement of the assessee’s father-in-law, withdrawing cash of Rs.2,40,000/-. He prayed that the aforesaid additional evidences are crucial for deciding the case of the assessee, therefore, the same may please be admitted under Rule 29 of the I.T.A.T. Rules. 6. The Ld. Sr. D.R. had no objection to the admission of the additional evidences. 7. Having gone through the additional evidences filed before me, I am of the view that these evidences go to the very root of the matter and are germane to proper determination/assessment in the case of the Assessee. Accordingly, I admit the same. 8. The Ld. A.R. further prayed that in the interest of natural justice, the matter may be restored back the file of the AO, where all the aforesaid additional evidences shall be ITA No.564/LKW/2024 Page 5 of 6 produced to prove the transactions entered into by the Assessee during the year under consideration. 9. The Ld. Senior D.R. had no objection to the restoration of appeal to the AO. 10. I have heard the ld. Senior Departmental Representative as well as the ld. AR and have also perused the material on record. Looking into the facts of this case, I am of the considered view that the Assessee deserves one more opportunity to present her case and, therefore, in the interest of substantial justice, I restore this file to the Office of the AO with the direction to provide one more opportunity to the Assessee to present her case. I have already admitted the additional evidences filed by the Assessee in the form of Gift Deed dated 07.07.2011 executed by the assessee’s father-in-law in favour of the assessee, Sale Agreements of properties sold by the assessee’s father-in-law and Bank statement of the assessee’s father-in-law under Rule 29 of the I.T.A.T. Rules. The Assessee shall produce them before the AO during the course of set aside proceedings. I also caution the Assessee to fully comply with the directions of the AO in the set- aside proceedings when called upon to do so, failing which, the AO shall be at complete liberty to pass the order in accordance ITA No.564/LKW/2024 Page 6 of 6 with law, based on material available on record even if it is ex- parte qua the Assessee. 11. In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 04/12/2024. Sd/- [SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:04/12/2024 JJ: Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR By order Assistant Registrar IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.564/LKW/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sangeeta Pandey House No.88, Majra Andandlok-II Ganeshpur, Rashmanpur Chinhat, Lucknow v. The Income Tax Officer Ward 1(4) Lucknow - New TAN/PAN:BQEPP1354H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Vivek Tiwari, C.A. Respondent by: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date of hearing: 02 12 2024 Date of pronouncement: 04 12 2024 O R D E R This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 16.07.2024, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer (AO) issued notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’), requiring the assessee to file the return of income for the year under consideration. However, the assessee did not file the return of income. The AO issued statutory notices to the assessee, requiring the assessee to furnish various details required for completing the assessment. However, there was no compliance from the side of the assessee. The AO, therefore, proceeded to complete the assessment under ITA No.564/LKW/2024 Page 2 of 6 section 144 of the Act. Subsequently, he obtained bank account statement of the assessee’s Bank Account No.000910110000417 with Aryawart Gramin Bank, A-2/46, Vijay Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow under section 133(6) of the Act, wherein from he noticed that there were cash deposits to the tune of Rs.33,00,500/- during the year under consideration. The AO treated the cash deposits as unexplained money and added the same to the income of the assessee under section 69A of the Act by invoking the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act. He, accordingly, computed the income of the assessee as under: Returned income (No ITR filed) : Nil Addition u/s.69A : Rs.33,00,500.00 Addition of Interest Income : Rs.45,807.00 Assessed Income : Rs.33,46,307.00 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the NFAC, who dismissed the appeal of the assessee by passing an order ex-parte qua the assessee. 4. Now, the assessee has approached this Tribunal challenging the action of the AO as well as the NFAC by raising the following grounds of appeal: 1.0 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in not admitting the additional evidence ITA No.564/LKW/2024 Page 3 of 6 u/r.46A, though such documents goes to the root of the case and there exist reasonable cause for not furnishing the documents on assessment record; 2.0 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in not considering the bonafide reasons that had precluded the appellant to furnish the details/documents on assessment record and further erred in not deciding the appeal on merits; 3.0 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made u/s.69A r.w.s 115BBE of cash deposits made in bank account of Rs.33,00,500/-; 4.0 The Ld. CIT(A), before confirming the addition u/s.69A of Rs.33,00,500/-, erred in not considering the understated vital facts, being; a) The source of cash deposits of Rs.13,00,000/- made on 12/03/2012 is out of cash withdrawal made from same bank account on same day of same amount; b) The balance cash deposits if Rs.20,00,000/- is sourced out of gift received from deceased father on contemplation of death, being sourced out of sale of residential plot; c) The Ld. AO ought to have conducted some enquiries on issuing the notice u/s. 133(6) to the bank and verified the source of cash deposits. 5. Before me, the Ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee (Ld. A.R.) submitted that both the authorities below have passed orders ex-parte qua the assessee, without providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. He further ITA No.564/LKW/2024 Page 4 of 6 submitted that the assessee had submitted additional evidences before the NFAC, but without admitting the same, they have dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The Ld. A.R. furnished before me the additional evidences in the form of Gift Deed dated 07.07.2011 executed by the assessee’s father-in-law in favour of the assessee, Sale Agreements of properties sold by the assessee’s father-in-law and Bank statement of the assessee’s father-in-law, withdrawing cash of Rs.2,40,000/-. He prayed that the aforesaid additional evidences are crucial for deciding the case of the assessee, therefore, the same may please be admitted under Rule 29 of the I.T.A.T. Rules. 6. The Ld. Sr. D.R. had no objection to the admission of the additional evidences. 7. Having gone through the additional evidences filed before me, I am of the view that these evidences go to the very root of the matter and are germane to proper determination/assessment in the case of the Assessee. Accordingly, I admit the same. 8. The Ld. A.R. further prayed that in the interest of natural justice, the matter may be restored back the file of the AO, where all the aforesaid additional evidences shall be ITA No.564/LKW/2024 Page 5 of 6 produced to prove the transactions entered into by the Assessee during the year under consideration. 9. The Ld. Senior D.R. had no objection to the restoration of appeal to the AO. 10. I have heard the ld. Senior Departmental Representative as well as the ld. AR and have also perused the material on record. Looking into the facts of this case, I am of the considered view that the Assessee deserves one more opportunity to present her case and, therefore, in the interest of substantial justice, I restore this file to the Office of the AO with the direction to provide one more opportunity to the Assessee to present her case. I have already admitted the additional evidences filed by the Assessee in the form of Gift Deed dated 07.07.2011 executed by the assessee’s father-in-law in favour of the assessee, Sale Agreements of properties sold by the assessee’s father-in-law and Bank statement of the assessee’s father-in-law under Rule 29 of the I.T.A.T. Rules. The Assessee shall produce them before the AO during the course of set aside proceedings. I also caution the Assessee to fully comply with the directions of the AO in the set- aside proceedings when called upon to do so, failing which, the AO shall be at complete liberty to pass the order in accordance ITA No.564/LKW/2024 Page 6 of 6 with law, based on material available on record even if it is ex- parte qua the Assessee. 11. In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 04/12/2024. Sd/- [SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:04/12/2024 JJ: Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR By order Assistant Registrar "