AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. NFAC, Delhi vide order dated 2.6.2025 pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13.
The assessee raised the following grounds in appeal:
1.That the CIT(A) is not justified in not accepting the additional evidences submitted by the assessee and confirming the assessment order u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 passed by the AO.
2.That the assessment of income of Rs. 82,59,000/-u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 is without jurisdiction, void ab initio and liable to be quashed as the AO erred in law while making the assessment without having reasons to believe which is the first condition to assume jurisdiction u/s. 147. The assessment is bad in the eyes of laws and liable to quashed.
3.That the AO erred in law and on facts while making the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 by treating the whole amount of cash of Rs. 82,59,000/- deposited in bank as the unexplained income of assessee while the said cash was deposited out of sale proceeds of the business of assessee. The said addition is bad in the eyes of law and liable to be deleted.
The brief facts of the case are that the department was in possession of AIR information, wherein it was reported that the assessee had deposited an amount of Rs. 82,59,000/- in his saving bank account during the FY 2011-12. Verification letter u/s. 133(6) of the Act dated 13.3.2019 was issued to the assessee. However, no compliance was made by the assessee. Consequently, a notice u/s. 148 dated 29.3.2019 was issued and duly served on the assessee. In response, the assessee did not file his return. Thereafter, notices u/s. 142(1) dated 7/5/2019 and 28/8/2019 was issued and served upon the assessee. A final show cause notice u/s. 144 of the Act dated 7.12.2019 was issued fixing the date of compliance. However, again there was no compliance from the assessee. Therefore, AO passed the order u/s. 144/147 of the Act dated 16.12.2019 by making the addition of Rs. 82,59,000/-. Against the above, assessee preferred the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee vide order dated 2.6.2025. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the tribunal.
We have heard both the parties and perused the records. We find that Ld. AR of the assessee submitted the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee without accepting the additional evidences filed by the assessee. It is evident from the order of the Ld. CIT(A) that the application for admission of additional evidences was filed u/R 46A of the ITAT Rules by the assessee on which the CIT(A) called the remand report from the AO and without accepting additional evidences, the appeal was dismissed. The assssee has not filed any document / evidence before the AO because as per assessee he has not received any notice from the AO. However, after receiving the notice u/s. 148 of the Act, the assessee filed the objection and also filed the additional evidences before the CIT(A). In our view, the CIT(A) should accept the additional evidences filed by the assessee and after calling the remand report from the AO, he should have decided the appeal in the interest of justice. Thus, we deem it fit to admit the additional evidences filed by the assessee and send the matter back to the CIT(A) to decide the same afresh, after calling the remand report from the AO and give adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.