IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD AHMEDABAD B BENCH Before Shri G.D. Agarwal, Vice-President (AZ) and Shri Mahavir Singh, Judicial Member ITA No.1204 -1205/ Ahd/2005 [Asstt. Years 1994-95 & 1995- 96] Shri Chandra M Tandel -vs- Income Tax Officer, W ard- 1, 101, Thiraj Apartment, Tithala Road, Valsad Valsad PAN No. ADLPP 9410D (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri H.P. Meena, SR-DR Assessee by: Shri Hardik Vora, AR ORDER PER BENCH:- These two appeals by assessee are arising out of common order of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) Valsad in appeal No.CIT(A)/VLS/299- 300/03-04 dated 22-11- 2004. assessments were framed by ITO, Ward-1, Valsad u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act ) vide his orders of even date 06- 01-2004 for assessment years 1994-95 and 1995-96 1. first common issue in these appeals of assessee is as regards to reopening of assessment u/s.147 r.w.s. 148 of Act. 2. At outset Ld. Counsel for assessee, Shri Hardik Vora has not pressed this common issue. Accordingly, same is dismissed as not pressed. 3. next common issue in these appeals of assessee is against order of CIT(A) confirming addition made by Assessing Officer on account of cash credit of Rs.2,65,260/- in assessment year 1994-95 and Rs.2,31,416/- in assessment year 1995-96. 4. We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of case. We find that, no doubt Assessing Officer has provided many opportunities to assessee to present his case but assessee has failed to comply with notices and has not availed opportunities granted by AO and accordingly he made addition of unexplained credits in both years. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A). 5. Before CIT(A) assessee claimed vide reply dated 04-11-2004, which is being reproduced as under:- With this duly signed documents (Satakhat) Xerox copy is produce herewith in which Shri Kritkumar S Desai has given Rs.6,00,000/- to me to pay in Gujarat Sate Finance Corporation and said Gujarat State Financial Corporation has acknowledged receipt of same. ANd to same Xerox copy is submitted produce before Income-tax Commissioner. And fixed deposit bearing Number:4118 and 4119 which stands in name of Rashmiben R Naik and Rameshchandra Authorized Representative Naik, same was withdrawn by Shri Kiritkumar S Desai for Rs.6,00,000/- same also produce before your Honour. Xerox copy of documents of sum borrower and lender, documents register number:464 also produce herewith. In above said case, through my advocate I have made false documentary evidence for purpose of fishing business, for which I am extremely sorry for same. I have borrowed sum from lender and same I have deposited in \ Gujarat State Financial Corporation, said documents I have to show in Income-tax and same I have not produce before them, so I my case I am facing confusion and for which I feel sorry and mistake which I have committed, same I am facing badly. I commit my mistake before your Honour in very genuine manner, for which please forgive me and if forgiveness given by you I will remain ever grateful to you, for which I pray. When this representation was sent to Assessing Officer for remand report by CIT(A), AO stated this plea was taken for first time and it was not taken before AO and accordingly CIT(A) has not considered plea of assessee. 6. We find that lower authorities are obliged to decide on merits in case assessee submits explanation in respect of cash credits, even though for first time before CIT(A). We find that assessee has produced copies of documents in respect of two loans given by Shri Kiritkumar S Desai for making payment of Rs.6 lakh to Gujarat State Finance Corporation by assessee. assessee has tried to explain source but it was not admitted by CIT(A). Accordingly, in interest of natural justice, we are of view that this common issue needs re- examination in enterity at level of Assessing Officer and this common issue of assessee s appeals is allowed for statistical purposes by sending back to file of Assessing Officer. 7. In result, both appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this day of 26th Nov, 2010 Sd/- Sd/- (G.D.Agarwal) (Mahavir Singh) (Vice President) (Judicial Member) Ahmedabad, Dated : 26/11/2010 *Dkp Copy of Order forwarded to:- 1. Assessee. 2. Revenue. 3. CIT(Appeals)-Valsad 4. CIT concerns. 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard File. /True copy/ BY ORDER, Deputy/Asstt.Registrar ITAT, Ahmedabad Shri Chandra M.Tandel v. Income Tax Officer- Ward-1