Sudhir Angre v. ITO (2022)93 ITR 69 (SN) (Pune)(Trib.) Sunil Angre v. ITO (2022)93 ITR 69 (SN) (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 69 : Unexplained investments-Deposit of cash in bank account-Addition was deleted-Cash deposits and withdrawal-Concealment penalty-Matter remanded. [S. 271(1)(c)]

Held, that the Assessing Officer had picked up only cash deposits entries from the bank account. But there was no reference to any withdrawals or re-deposits in the bank account. The addition was one-sided without considering the assessee’s contention and the Commissioner (Appeals) had accepted the genuineness of Rs. 1.50 lakhs without any elaboration. Therefore, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer to decide the issue afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee to explain the source of deposits in the bank account and consider the withdrawals made from the bank account, if any. The assessment and the penalty proceedings were held ex parte since the assessee could not participate in such proceedings because of dispute going on with his counsel. Therefore, the matter was restored to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide it afresh after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. (AY.2012-13)