TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2426X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee must be afforded an opportunity to establish the same and not reject the said recourse on the ground that the assessee did not appear before the learned CIT(A) earlier. We, therefore, in the interest of equity and justice set aside the orders of the authorities below and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to consider afresh the matter relating to the addition of ₹ 31,00,000/- u/s 68 after affording the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. We are not passing any order on the admission of additional evidence put forth by the assessee in terms of Rule 29. However, liberty is given to the assessee to produce before the Assessing Officer material/details/evidence in support of the claim of genu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plain the source thereof. Since no explanation was forthcoming, the Assessing Officer treated the same as unexplained cash credits u/s 68 of the Act and brought the same to tax in the assessee s hands. The assessment was concluded u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 28/11/2008, wherein the income of the assessee was determined at ₹ 32,85,219/- as against the returned income of ₹ 1,85,219/-, in view of the addition of ₹ 31,00,000/- on account of unexplained cash credits u/s 68 of the Act. 2.2 Aggrieved by the order of the assessment for asst. year 2006-07 dated 28/11/2008, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A)- III, Bangalore, accompanied by a condonation petition since this appeal was filed belatedly by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xplained sources. The claim of the amount having been accumulated out of funds in the appellant s HUF remains unsubstantiated in the course of the appellate proceedings in spite of more than adequate opportunities having been given. I therefore have to reluctantly come to the conclusion that the appellant has failed to discharge its onus of defending his case with evidences and proof [both on merits and in the context of the inordinate delay in filing the appeal] and, therefore, I proceed to dismiss the appeal under these circumstances. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A)-III, Bangalore dated 31/5/2013 for that year 2006-07, the assessee is in appeal raising the following grounds: i. The orders of the authorities below ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and mandatory and the Assessing Officer has no discretion in the matter. This proposition has been upheld by the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Anjum Ghaswalla Others in 252 ITR 1 (SC) and we, therefore uphold the action of the Assessing Officer in charging the assessee the said interest. The Assessing Officer, is however, directed to re-compute the interest chargeable u/s 234A and 234B of the Act, if any, while giving effect to this order. 6.1 Ground at SNo.2 and 3 are therefore, the only effective grounds in this appeal wherein the assessee has challenged the confirmation of the addition of ₹ 31,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer in respect of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. According to the learned AR for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the ITAT, Bangalore in the case of Anupam Kothari in ITA No.837/Bang/2012 dated 5/9/2014 and submitted that the assessee s plea for admission of additional evidence should not be entertained since the requirement of Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules are not satisfied. 6.3.1 We have heard the rival contentions and perused and carefully considered the material on record. From a perusal of the impugned order we find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal both on merits of the grounds raised; that the assessee has not discharged the onus of proving the credits with evidence and that the reasons for seeking condonation of delay were not acceptable. On an appreciation of the material on record we feel that the learned CIT(A) ought not to h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e before us in an attempt to show that he had sufficient sources to explain the capital introduced in the year under consideration. In this view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the assessee must be afforded an opportunity to establish the same and not reject the said recourse on the ground that the assessee did not appear before the learned CIT(A) earlier. We, therefore, in the interest of equity and justice set aside the orders of the authorities below and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to consider afresh the matter relating to the addition of ₹ 31,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act, after affording the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. We are not passing any order on the admission of additional ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
