The Nagpur Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) upheld the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) emphasizing that once the assessee’s income computation is admitted before CIT(A), it cannot be easily contested at the tribunal.
Assessee, Satish Kumar Madanlal Gupta, had not filed his income return for the assessment year 2009-10. As per AIR information, the assessing officer found that the assessee deposited cash of Rs. 5,28,35,205 in his Bank of Baroda account and issued a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessing officer noted that the assessee had failed to file his income tax return. The AO added the entire cash deposit as unexplained income under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act and passed an order under Section 144 r.w.s 147 of the Act.
Aggrieved by the AO order, the assessee appealed before the CIT(A). The assessee made various submissions back and forth which were sent to the AO for examination. The CIT(A) directed AO to compute the taxable income of the assessee considering the income of the assessee as well as any other deductions under chapter-VI-A of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) finally upheld the addition of Rs. 51,58,766, by treating the assessee’s appeal of the assessee as partly allowed.
Get a Copy of Income Tax Act, Click here
Aggrieved by the CIT(A) order, the assessee appealed before the ITAT, Nagpur. The assessee’s counsel represented by M.K.M. Agrawal pleaded to restore the matter to the file of the assessing officer as the assessee will demonstrate and produce more evidence regarding the source of the cash deposit in the bank.
The revenue counsel represented by Kailash C. Kanojiya argued that the assessee was not cooperative during the proceedings with the CIT(A). Thus, No further opportunity should be extended.
The two-member bench comprising Durga Rao (Judicial Member) and K.M. Roy (Accountant Member) found that the assessee never cared to file any income tax return and did not produce an account book. The tribunal noted that the CIT(A) took 3.5 years for adjudication and appropriate rebuttals were made by the Assessing Officer.
Get a Copy of Income Tax Act, Click here
The tribunal noted that there was no lack of opportunity and found no merit in the assessee’s request. The tribunal emphasized that once the assessee had acknowledged the income computation before the CIT(A), they could not reverse their position and argue against it before the tribunal. Thus, the tribunal upheld the CIT(A) order and dismissed the assessee’s appeal.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
