Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (5) TMI 817 - ITAT HYDERABADUnaccounted cash credit - CIT(A)'s appreciating the fact that the assessee's credit card statements do not show any entry of credit card swiping for cash withdrawals - Uaaccounted credit card swiping for cash withdrawal - peak credit benefit to the assessee on the cash withdrawals from the bank accounts given by CIT(A) = Held that:- It was only during the course of proceedings before the CIT(A), the respondentassessee filed the cash flow statement, wherein the sources for the above are supposed to have been explained. However, the AO on remand report had not accepted the cash flow statement in the absence of evidence filed in support of the cash sources shown in the cash flow statement. Even during the course of remand proceedings, the Ld. AO was not satisfied about the explanation rendered for the sources for cash deposits in the bank and the payments made for credit cards. The Ld. CIT(A) without meeting the objections raised by the AO has simply accepted the explanation tendered by the respondent-assessee and he went on discussing about peak credit theory without discussing as to how the fact situation of the case fits into peak credit theory and we find from the grounds of appeal filed before him that no such ground was raised. The additions were made purely based on facts, unless the facts were duly verified by the AO, the addition should not have been deleted. The CIT(A) in the impugned order had not dealt with the facts of the case, he simply referred to certain case laws governing the peak credit theory which is not the germane to the issue on hand before him. The impugned order gives no reason which would indicate as to why the additions are deleted. The order is bereft of reasons and does not discuss the facts of the case. Therefore, the order suffers from the vice of being an order without reasons. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held in the case of CCT Vs. Shukla Brothers [2010 (4) TMI 139 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] held that, recording of reasons is an essential feature of providing justice and in fact is the soul of orders. Further, the Supreme Court in the case of Kranti Associates (P) Ltd. Vs. Masood Alam Khan [2010 (9) TMI 886 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] has summarized the principles for recording reasons. Thus the order of CIT(A) cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. Remit the matter back to the file of CIT(Appeals) for fresh adjudication of the issue after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the respondent-assessee. - Decided in favour of revenue for statistical purposes.
|