Assessee's Appeals Dismissed, CIT(A)'s Findings Upheld. Consistent Decisions Across Years. Order on 23/05/2019

The Tribunal dismissed all appeals filed by the assessee, upholding the CIT(A)'s findings on all issues. The decisions were consistent across all assessment years, resulting in the dismissal of appeals on similar grounds. The order was pronounced on 23/05/2019.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Violation of Natural Justice
2. Addition of Rs. 2,34,52,668/- as Unexplained Cash Credit
3. Addition of Rs. 1,55,000/- as income as per 26AS

Detailed Analysis:

Issue No. 1 & 2: Violation of Natural Justice

The assessee contended that the CIT(A) upheld the assessment order passed by the AO without issuing any notice under sections 143(2) or 142(1) and without providing a copy of the seized material on which the notice under section 153C was issued. The assessee also argued that the AO relied on the assessment of another assessee, JIK Industries Pvt. Ltd., without providing a copy of the order or an opportunity for cross-examination, thus violating the principles of natural justice.

The Tribunal noted that the order passed under section 144/142(1) read with section 153C had already been set aside by the Commissioner of Income Tax under section 263. Since the assessee did not challenge the order under section 263, the non-issuance of notice under sections 143(2)/142(1) and the non-supply of seized material under section 153C had no consequences. The AO had provided an opportunity to the assessee by issuing a notice dated 01.03.2016, but the assessee failed to appear or provide evidence. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s findings, deciding this issue in favor of the revenue.

Issue No. 3, 4 & 5: Addition of Rs. 2,34,52,668/- as Unexplained Cash Credit

The assessee challenged the addition of Rs. 2,34,52,668/- as unexplained cash credit under section 68. The AO observed that the total credits in the assessee's HDFC bank account for the financial year 2005-06 amounted to Rs. 2,44,29,863/-, which were withdrawn immediately after deposit. Initially, the AO treated the deposits as commission income, but under section 263, the entire deposit amount was added as unexplained cash credit.

The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not produce any documents or evidence to substantiate its claim before the AO or CIT(A). The CIT(A) found that the assessee did not appeal against the section 263 order and had not provided any explanation for the deposits. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s findings, confirming the addition as unexplained cash credit and deciding the issue in favor of the revenue.

Issue No. 6: Addition of Rs. 1,55,000/- as income as per 26AS

The assessee challenged the addition of Rs. 1,55,000/- as per the 26AS statement, arguing that the amount was reflected in the bank statement and books of the assessee, leading to double taxation. The CIT(A) noted that the assessee did not make any submission regarding this ground during the appellate proceedings, concluding that the issue was not pressed.

The Tribunal observed that the assessee did not press this issue before them either and did not provide any supporting evidence. Consequently, the Tribunal confirmed the CIT(A)'s findings and decided this issue in favor of the revenue.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal dismissed all the appeals filed by the assessee, upholding the findings of the CIT(A) on all issues. The decisions were consistent across all the assessment years involved, leading to the dismissal of the appeals on similar grounds. The order was pronounced in the open court on 23/05/2019.

---