Tribunal allows appeal partially in tax matter, directs reliance on Form 26AS figures for income computation.

The appeal was partly allowed by the tribunal in a tax matter. The tribunal dismissed the issue regarding proper hearing opportunity. For the addition of Rs. 11,16,426 on account of balance commission, the tribunal directed the AO to rely on Form 26AS figures, resulting in the computation of taxable income. Regarding the addition of Rs. 5,92,100 on account of unexplained cash credit, the tribunal reduced the addition to Rs. 1,97,070 due to lack of evidence provided by the assessee. Adjustments were directed to be made by the AO in consideration of the undisclosed income. The tribunal factored in the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in its decision-making process.

---

---

Issues:
1. Proper opportunity of hearing not given by the ld. CIT(A)
2. Addition of Rs. 11,16,426/- on account of balance commission
3. Addition of Rs. 5,92,100/- on account of unexplained cash credit

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed due to the ld. CIT(A) not providing proper hearing opportunity, which was dismissed as not pressed.
2. The addition of Rs. 11,16,426/- on account of balance commission was challenged. The AO added this amount due to a discrepancy in commission receipts shown by the assessee. The tribunal noted that the Form 16A and Form 26AS reflected different figures. Form 26AS, being maintained by the Income-tax Department, was considered more reliable. The tribunal directed the AO to adopt the figures from Form 26AS, resulting in the taxable income being computed accordingly.
3. The addition of Rs. 5,92,100/- on account of unexplained cash credit was also contested. The AO found unexplained cash deposits in the assessee's bank accounts. The assessee claimed the money belonged to other parties for onward transfer, but failed to provide evidence. The tribunal reduced the addition to Rs. 1,97,070/- considering the income already determined in the previous issue. The AO was directed to adjust the undisclosed income accordingly.

The tribunal considered the extraordinary situation of the COVID-19 pandemic and excluded lockdown days for pronouncing the judgment. The appeal was partly allowed based on the detailed analysis and evidence presented during the proceedings.

---