TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal remands case for reassessment validity, emphasizes record verification. Appellant's cash credit challenge not addressed.</h1> <h3>Girish Mulji Furia Versus ITO 25 (2) (4), Mumbai</h3> The Tribunal remanded the case for further consideration by the CIT(A) regarding the validity of reassessment proceedings, emphasizing the need to verify ... Validity of proceedings u/s. 148 - Held that:- It is apparent that original assessment was framed u/s. 143(3). The reasons referred to some proceedings related to the original assessment and alleged that some details were not filed by the assessee at that time. However, at the same time it is seen that no addition was made by the learned AO. There is merit in the contention of the learned DR that the original assessment order is very short and does not refer to agricultural income of the assessee, which indicates non-disclosure Be that as it may, learned CIT(A) in the interest of justice should have called for assessment record and verified the proceeding sheet and correspondence between the AO and the assessee and considered the objections raised on the validity of section 147. It appears that this issue has been decided by the learned CIT(A) without verifying these aspects, which are relevant to decide ground no.1 In the entirety of facts and circumstances, interest of justice will be served if appeal is set aside and restored to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the same afresh after giving the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard on this aspect.- Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes Issues:1. Validity of reassessment proceedings2. Treatment of loan amount as unexplained cash credit3. Disallowance of agricultural income as unexplained cash credit4. Treatment of deposits in bank accounts as unexplained cash creditIssue 1: Validity of reassessment proceedingsThe appellant challenged the initiation of re-assessment proceedings, arguing that the original assessment was already completed under section 143(3) and all necessary information was provided. The reassessment was based on deposits in bank accounts and alleged non-disclosure of material facts. The AO reopened the case under section 147, suspecting income had escaped assessment. The appellant contended that this was a mere change of opinion and cited relevant case law. The CIT(A) upheld the validity of the reassessment, stating that it was based on factual information and not a change of opinion. The appellant's objections were dismissed, leading to an appeal. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) should have verified the assessment record to determine if the reasons for reassessment were valid. The case was remanded to the CIT(A) for further consideration, and an application for additional evidence was rejected.Issue 2: Treatment of loan amount as unexplained cash creditThe appellant disputed the treatment of a loan amount as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The AO questioned the source of the loan and the lack of evidence provided by the appellant. The Tribunal's decision on this issue was not explicitly mentioned in the summary provided.Issue 3: Disallowance of agricultural income as unexplained cash creditThe appellant contested the disallowance of agricultural income and its treatment as unexplained cash credit. The AO raised concerns about the lack of supporting documentation for the agricultural income claimed by the appellant. The Tribunal's decision on this issue was not explicitly mentioned in the summary provided.Issue 4: Treatment of deposits in bank accounts as unexplained cash creditThe appellant challenged the treatment of deposits in two bank accounts as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The AO raised questions about the source of these deposits and the absence of business income explanations. The Tribunal's decision on this issue was not explicitly mentioned in the summary provided.In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment primarily focused on the validity of the reassessment proceedings, remanding the case for further consideration by the CIT(A) to ensure a fair assessment. The detailed analysis highlighted the importance of verifying assessment records and considering objections raised by the appellant. The decision on the treatment of specific amounts as unexplained cash credit was not explicitly stated in the summary.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
