The Tax PublishersITA No. 297/Chd/2017
2020 TaxPub(DT) 5445 (Chd-Trib)INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 69
Where additional evidences furnished by assessee in the form of affidavit of the assessee as well as of the seller of land from whom assessee purchased the agricultural land, were not available either to CIT(A) or to AO for their consideration, however, these new evidences were furnished, go to the root of matter, since there was no discussion in order and even that letter was also not available to AO who passed the assessment order, therefore, matter was remanded back to AO to be considered afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to assessee.
|
Income from undisclosed source - Addition under section 69 - Admission of additional evidence - Purchase of agricultural land
Assessee's return was selected for scrutiny and AO asked assessee to file the return of income by issuing a notice under section 142(1). It was also submitted that assessee purchased agricultural land by using OD limit availed from a bank which later got merged with another bank and that the bank had not supplied the copy of statement by citing reasons of old record. AO observed that details of bank accounts of assessee revealed that opening balance was 'nil' and an amount was credited, therefore, the claim of assessee that he had invested in property by raising a loan from a Bank was contrary to the facts on record. Accordingly, AO made addition on account of unexplained investment. Assessee furnished additional evidences under rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 before CIT(A), who forwarded the same to AO. In response, AO stated that addition was rightly made on account of failure on the part of assessee to explain satisfactorily the source of investment and objected for admission of additional evidences. Held: It was an admitted fact that the additional evidences furnished by assessee in the form of affidavit of the assessee as well as of seller of land from whom the assessee purchased the agricultural land, were not available either to CIT(A) or to AO for their consideration, however, these new evidences now furnished, go to the root of the matter, therefore the same are admitted. Evidences furnished by assessee first time before the Bench of the ITAT were not available to the authorities and even the letter to CIT(A) appeared to be not considered. Since there was no discussion in order and even that letter was also not available to AO who passed assessment order, therefore, matter was remanded back to AO to be considered afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : Matter remanded.
A.Y. : 2007-08
IN THE ITAT, CHANDIGARH BENCH
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|