2010 (8) TMI 965 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal remands case for reassessment, assessee to be heard

Mrs. Shama Akil Sarang Versus ITO 13 (3) (4) Mumbai

The Tribunal remanded the case back to the Assessing Officer for reevaluation based on a newly submitted cash flow statement, providing the assessee with ... - Issues involved: Appeal against assessment u/s. 144 for A.Y. 2005-06, addition of undisclosed income/cash credit u/s. 68, explanation of source of investment, examination of source funds u/s. 69.Assessment u/s. 144: The assessee, an individual, did not file a return of income despite notice u/s. 142(1) regarding sale of property for Rs. 24,31,800. The Assessing Officer presumed valid service of notice and made an addition of the same amount as undisclosed income/cash credit u/s. 68.Appeal before CIT(A): The assessee submitted evidence of purchasing a flat jointly with another individual and borrowing a portion of the amount from a bank. The CIT(A) accepted part of the explanation but rejected the claim for Rs. 5,06,621, citing insufficient cash deposits from beauty parlour business and lack of supporting bank statements.Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal addressed the issue of examining source funds u/s. 69, stating that the CIT(A) acted within his powers by considering the source of investment. Regarding the disputed Rs. 5,06,621, the Tribunal requested a cash flow statement for further examination by the Assessing Officer, remanding the issue for fresh consideration with an opportunity for the assessee to be heard.Conclusion: The appeal of the assessee was treated as allowed for statistical purposes, and the case was remanded back to the Assessing Officer for reevaluation based on the newly submitted cash flow statement.