TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 669X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng certain observations about the failure of the assessee to furnish the details and the observations are seriously disputed by the assessee - the assessees have filed copies of returns of income filed for earlier years as additional evidences would show that they were not furnished before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings – the CIT(A) has made certain presumptions before proceeding to adjudicate the issues and the said presumption entertained by CIT(A) is being questioned by the assessees – thus, the matter is required to be remitted back to the AO for fresh adjudication –Decided in favour of Assessee. - I.T.A. No.6594/Mum/2012, I.T.A. No.6595/Mum/2012 - - - Dated:- 28-2-2014 - Shri B. R. Mittal, JM And Shri B. R. Bas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by way of cash in the bank accounts maintained by them. The AO noticed that Ms. Hetal P Dedhia had deposited an aggregate amount of Rs.27.58 lakhs. Mr. Hemal Bhanji Dedhia had deposited an aggregate amount of Rs.47.31 lakhs in the bank account standing in his name and further a sum of Rs.24.62 lakhs in a bank account maintained jointly with Mr. Forum Hemal Dedhia. Thus, the aggregate amount of deposit made in all the bank accounts by Mr. Hemal Bhanji Dedhia worked out to Rs.71.83 lakhs. Since the assessees did not furnish the details explaining the sources for making cash deposits, the AO proposed to assess the same as the income of the assessee. In the hands of Ms. Hetal P Dedhia, the AO gave set off of opening cash balance of Rs.1,73,990/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hough both of them had maintained bank accounts. Accordingly, the Ld CIT(A) rejected the claim of the assessees that the sources for making the deposits into the bank account are the repayment of loans given by them earlier, since both the assessees could not substantiate their claims with supporting evidences. By placing reliance on the following case laws, the Ld CIT(A) rejected the contentions of the assessee. (a) Ashok Mahindru (173 Taxman 178)(Del) (b) smt. Vasanthibai Shah (213 ITR 805)(Bom) (c) Durga Prasad More (82 ITR 540)(SC) (d) Associated Rubber Industry (157 ITR 77)(SC) (e) Smt. Nayantara C Aggarwal Vs. CIT (207 ITR 639)(Bom) (f) Smt. Sumati Dayal (214 ITR 801)(SC) (g) J.S. Parkar (94 ITR 616)(Bom) In re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... intained by the assessee are not properly explained. He submitted that the assessees were not asked by the AO to furnish the books of accounts and hence the AO was not justified in making additions u/s 68 of the Act. The Ld A.R furnished copies of returns of income filed for the earlier years as additional evidences in both the cases and pleaded that the same may be accepted by the Tribunal. 6. The Ld D.R, on the other hand, submitted that the Ld CIT(A), by exercising his co-terminus power, has examined the claim made by the assessee in a detailed manner. The Ld D.R, by inviting our attention to the operative portion of the orders of Ld CIT(A), submitted that the assessees have failed to furnish the names and details of persons to whom t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the Ld CIT(A) has only examined the reply given by the assessee with regard to the sources of deposits found to have been made by them in the bank accounts. With regard to the query as to why the AO did not reopen the assessment of earlier years, the Ld D.R submitted that the said action was not taken, since the deposits were assessed as the income of the assessees for the year under consideration, in the absence of the details to explain the sources of the deposits 7. In the rejoinder, the Ld A.R submitted that the Ld CIT(A) has drawn his own conclusions on the basis of surmises and conjectures. He submitted that the Ld CIT(A), in para 3.3 of the order passed in the hands of Hetal P Dedhia, has observed that the assessee has failed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aims made by both the assessees in a detailed manner and hence no purpose would be served by sending the matters again to the file of the assessing officer. However, as pointed out by Ld A.R, we notice that the Ld CIT(A) has proceeded on certain assumptions without calling for explanations from the assessee. We notice that the Ld CIT(A) has observed that the assessees have failed to furnish the names, addresses and other details of loans creditors. In reply thereto the Ld A.R submitted that the assessee was not asked for those details and further since the details called for relate to the transactions undertaken about 8 to 10 years back, it was very difficult for the assessees to furnish the same. Accordingly, the Ld A.R submitted that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
