TMI Blog2020 (9) TMI 292X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it has been appreciated that the AO is harping upon an AIR information. He should have analytically examined AIR information and should have called for further information from the bank, if some non-bank transaction is reflected, which is to be considered as unexplained credit. Punishment in the shape of tax liability on addition of ₹ 27,15,600/- and ₹ 19,44,000/- is quite disproportionate than the negligence at the end of the assessee before the AO - CIT(A) ought to have taken additional evidence on record for a just decision of appeal. The quasi-judicial authorities are being respected not on account of their power to legalize injustice on technical ground, but because they are capable of removing the injustice, and is exp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which were added by the AO with aid of section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Ground no.6 is general ground of appeal, which does not call for recording of any finding. 3. With the assistance of the ld.representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. A perusal of the record would indicate that the assessee is an educational society registered under section 12AA of the Income Tax Act. It has filed its return of income on 2.10.2014 electronically, declaring total income at NIL. It has claimed deduction for utilization of fund for the objects of the Trust under section 11 of the Income Tax Act. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment, and notice under section 143(2) was issued and received by the assessee. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... considered rival contentions, case law relied upon and observations made by the A.O. in the assessment order. It is observed that A.O. has made an addition of ₹ 27,15,600/- on account of cash deposits made by the appellant in its bank account with Unjha Nagarik Sahkari Bank Ltd. On failure of the appellant to explain these cash deposits before the A.O., A.O. has treated them as unexplained cash deposits u/s.68 of the Act and added back to the total income of the appellant. It is seen from the submission of the appellant that appellant had declared ₹ 27,15,600/- as corpus receipts and has claimed deduction u/s.11(1)(d) of the Act. Appellant has maintained separate bank account with Unjha Nagarik Sahkari Bank Ltd. for the pur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 19,44,000/- on account of cash transactions in bank accounts with Market Yard Commercial Co-op.Bank Ltd. and Mehsana Urban Co-op.Bank Ltd. In the written submission filed in the Dak by the appellant, appellant has mentioned that amount received in Mehsana Urban Co-op.Bank Ltd. account (with regard to F.D. of ₹ 15,00,000/- with Mehsana Urban Co-op.Bank Ltd.) is the amount transferred from Unjha Nagrik Sahkari.Bank Ltd! With regard to the amount deposited in Market Yard Commercial Co-op.Bank Ltd., appellant has mentioned that it is not able to ascertain on what basis A.O. has quantified the amount of ₹ 4,44,500/- in the said bank. It is seen from the order of assessment that A.O. has verified from the AIR information generat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d additional evidence before the Tribunal, and sought to place on record 143 pages containing various vouchers/receipts, bank details etc. The assessee has further pleaded that this additional evidence, in the interest of justice, be taken on record, and matter be remitted to the AO for further investigation. 6. On the other hand, the stand of the Revenue is that the assessee has already been given sufficient opportunity. It failed to file the details before the AO. The ld.CIT(A) has considered this aspect, and only thereafter declined to take material on record. 7. On due consideration of the above facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the ld.Revenue authorities have not analytically examined the material even available be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal of the assessee for statistical purpose, but subject to payment of cost. This cost is quantified at ₹ 10,000/- which is to be paid by the assessee, and certificate to this effect would be furnished before the AO as well as to the Registry of the Tribunal. Both the orders are set aside, and all the issues are restored to the file of the AO who will adjudicate the case in accordance with law. The assessee will be at liberty to submit any evidence/explanation in support of its case. 9. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose subject to payment of cost of ₹ 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand). Order pronounced in the Court on 3rd September, 2020 at Ahmedabad. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
