Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2018 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 1259 - KERALA HIGH COURTUnexplained fixed deposits - Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) admitted the fixed deposit register as a fresh evidence without giving an opportunity of being heard to the Assessing Officer as prescribed under Rule 46A(3) - Held that:- The verification said to have been done by the appellate authority is only a perusal of the list and not a verification of the genuineness of such transactions. The details as entered in the list of cheque payments were also taken as true by the first appellate authority. The first appellate authority erred in having so deleted the addition on mere assumption based on surmises and conjectures; without actually verifying the genuineness of the transactions. The Tribunal also relied on the findings of the CIT (Appeals) with respect to the verification done for the previous years. There is absolutely no verification done as to how many deposits of the previous year were revalidated in the present year. This is a permissible exercise by the AO, who has to do it at the first instance. In fact, the first appellate authority could also have done the said exercise or at least called for a remand report from the AO, which measure was not resorted to. In such circumstances, though after 22 years, we are constrained to remand the matter to the AO. The assessee shall produce the list of depositors and prove their genuineness before the AO. Question of law is answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.
|