AO added Rs.89,49,138 u/s 69A as unexplained money, Taxpayer submitted paper book explaining each entries: ITAT Remands Matter for Reconsideration [Read Order]

The Ranchi Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) remanded the addition of Rs. 89,49,138 under section 69A of the Income Tax Act matter back to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] after considering that the assessee submitted a paper book explaining entries.

Mahavir Enterprises (assessee) deposited Rs. 91,55,652 for the whole year including Rs. 11,44,500 which was deposited during the demonetization period from 09.11.2016 to 30.12.2016. The assessee deposited cash in his bank account in the Giridih Branch of the Bank of India. The information was received by the Assessing Officer (AO) from AIMS. The AO found that the assessee did not file an income tax return for the relevant assessment year (AY).

The AO issued notices to the assessee to show the source of cash deposits. However, the assessee failed to appear and explain the source of cash deposits. The assessee did not make any arrangement to represent the case to explain the source of cash to the AO. So, the AO added Rs. 89,49,138 as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Understanding Common Mode of Tax Evasion with Practical Scenarios, Click Here

Aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A). The appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) stating that the assessee was not interested in explaining the case to the commissioner. The CIT(A) also highlighted that the assessee did not comply with notices issued by the CIT(A). Aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed an appeal before ITAT.

The counsel for the assessee submitted a paper book which contained all details with an explanation of each and every entry of cash deposits. The counsel for the assessee also contended that the paper book contains every detail and there was no reason to make any addition against the assessee.

The two-member bench comprising Sarathi Chaudhury (Judicial Member) and Ratnesh Nandhan Sahay (Accountant Member) observed that the paper book with details was not produced before AO and CIT(A).

Therefore, the tribunal held the matter should be remanded back to CIT(A) and the case should be decided on merit after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates