2022 (2) TMI 391 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal grants appeal stressing evidence, directs fresh assessment on additional proof

Bhaga Doshi Cottex C/o Rasesh Shah & Associates Versus Income Tax Officer Ward-3 (2), Surat

The Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of providing adequate evidence to substantiate claims and directing a ... Rejection of book results u/s 145(3) - Addition on account of unexplained cash receipts from loan and advances given in earlier years - HELD THAT:- We find that the books of account was rejected by Assessing Officer for the want of supporting vouchers and cash books. Similarly, the addition was also made by taking view that no sufficient evidence to substantiate the claim was furnished by Assessing Officer. CIT(A) also confirmed the addition for the want of evidence. Now before us the assessee has filed voluminous evidence and prayed for admission of additional evidence. Considering the fact that the certain entries recorded in the cash books are having direct bearing on the issue under consideration - considering the relevancy of documents, we admit the additional evidence and restore the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer who examine both the issue/ disallowances afresh and pass the order in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed to provide all necessary evidence, documents and information to the Assessing Officer and not to cause for further delay before the Assessing Officer. Hence, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. Issues involved:1. Rejection of book results under section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act.2. Addition of Rs. 1,50,00,000 on account of unexplained cash receipts from loan and advances given in earlier years.3. Addition of Rs. 90,000 on account of unexplained cash received from debtors.Analysis:Issue 1: Rejection of book results under section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act:The Assessing Officer rejected the books of account under section 145(3) due to the lack of supporting vouchers and cash books. The assessee failed to produce sufficient documents, leading to the addition of Rs. 1.50 crores on account of unexplained cash received. The CIT(A) upheld the rejection of books of account, citing discrepancies and the failure of the assessee to provide necessary evidence. The Tribunal admitted additional evidence filed by the assessee, which had a direct bearing on the issue. Consequently, the matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh examination of the issue.Issue 2: Addition of Rs. 1,50,00,000 on account of unexplained cash receipts from loan and advances given in earlier years:The assessee contended that the cash received was from debtors for sales already recorded in the books of the firm, and hence, there was no concealment of income. However, the CIT(A) rejected this explanation, stating that the assessee failed to provide sufficient evidence to support the claim. The Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, directing the Assessing Officer to re-examine the issue with the additional evidence submitted by the assessee.Issue 3: Addition of Rs. 90,000 on account of unexplained cash received from debtors:The assessee argued that the amount was receivable from sales already recorded in the books of the firm. However, the CIT(A) upheld the addition, noting the lack of evidence provided by the assessee to substantiate the claim. The Tribunal admitted additional evidence and remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh examination, directing the assessee to provide all necessary evidence and information without causing further delay.In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of providing adequate evidence to substantiate claims and directing a fresh examination of the issues by the Assessing Officer based on the additional evidence submitted by the assessee.