AMAAN SADIQ,RAJASTHAN V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NEW DELHI

ITA 5553/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Amann Sadiq, the appellant, who is engaged in providing KYC services through his proprietary concern, M/s Mehar Enterprises, to One97 Communications Ltd. The dispute arose from the Income Tax Officer's addition of Rs. 16,18,485 to the appellant's income for the assessment year 2018-19, based on discrepancies between the income reported in the tax return and the updated Form 26AS. The appellant argued that the additional income pertained to services rendered in the subsequent assessment year 2019-20, and was already accounted for in that year. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant's position, noting that the income was reported and TDS was deducted in the correct financial year, thus it should not be taxed in the earlier assessment year.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 783389 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 08-09-2025
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: TRIQ NAFEES
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; TDS; FORM 26AS

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC’’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT ITA No. 5553/Del/2025 Asstt. Year: 2018-19 AMANN SADIQ, VS. Income Tax Officer, D-109, Shastri Nagar, Mayur Bhawan, Jodhpur, Jaipur, Connaught Place, Rajasthan, Jodhpur New Delhi – 110 001 (PAN: ADAPS9738E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Triq Nafees, Adv. Respondent by : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing 28.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 07.11.2025 ORDER This appeal by the assessee is emanating from the order of the Ld. NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1075617327(1) dated 15.04.2025 relating to assessment year 2018-19. 2. At the time of hearing, it is noted that assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay of 86 days stating therein that due to unavoidable family issues which were beyond his control, the assessee was not able to file the appeal within the stipulated time. After hearing both the sides and perusing the records, I am of the considered view that reasonable reasons have been attributed to the assessee for filing the belated appeal, hence, the period of delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Printed from counselvise.com 2 | P a g e 3. The only issue of this appeal of assessee is as regards to the order of the CIT(A) confirming the action of the AO in making addition on account of receipts of services rendered to pertaining to next assessment year 2019-20 in the relevant assessment year 2018-19. For this, assessee has raised various grounds which are argumentative, exhaustive and need not be reproduced. 4. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is engaged in the business of providing Know Your Customer (KYC) services through its proprietary concern M/s Mehar Enterprises to One97 Communications Ltd. The assessee filed his return of income for the relevant assessment year 2018-19 on 01.11.2018 based on Form 26AS issued on 29.10.2018 reflecting total receipts of Rs. 1,13,01,050/- and according to him there is variance and lower declaration of receipts to the extent of Rs. 16,18,485/-. The Assessing Officer therefore, made the addition of Rs.16,18,485/-. Aggrieved, Assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and also confirmed the action of the AO. Against the same, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. I have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. I noticed that the difference in receipts has arisen due to income/receipts reported as per Form 26AS. I noted that the assessee filed its return on 02.11.2018 which shows receipts of Rs. 96,82,565/-. This Form 26AS was updated in February, 2019 i.e. on 18.02.2019 which shows receipts to the tune of Rs. 1,13,01,050/-. It was claimed by the Assessee that Tax Audit Report already filed cannot be revised due to which the assessee can revise return of income and carry forward extra income and TDS. Assessee before AO as well as before CIT(A) claimed that excess receipts as per updated Form 26AS dated 18.12.2019 there is brought forward TDS and both the excess receipts as well as TDS was claimed in Assessment Year 2019-20 for the reasons that the GST of extra invoices reflected in updated Printed from counselvise.com 3 | P a g e 26AS was paid in Financial year 2018-19 relevant to assessment year 2019- 20. Assessee before me could show the GST invoices as declared in GSTR1 only in June, 2018 and the invoices are dated 12.4.2018 and 12.5.2018. The assessee has produced document that the payee One97 Communication Ltd. Made excess payment due to settlement to the assessee for the above invoices for which they have deducted TDS in financial year 2017-18 relevant to assessment year 2018-19. The above factual position shows that the assessee has already been declared the income / receipts of Rs. 16,18,485/- and claimed TDS on the same only in Assessment year 2019-20. Moreover, these receipts / income relates to GST invoices of April, 2018 and May, 2018 and does no pertain to the relevant assessment year 2018-19. In my view, first of all, this is revenue neutral and secondly, the assessee has rightly declared this income in AY 2019-20 and it cannot be taxed in the relevant assessment year 2018-19. Accordingly, I delete this addition and accordingly allow the appeal of the assessee. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced on 07.11.2025. Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) VICE PRESIDENT Date: 07-11-2025 SRBhatnagar Copy forwarded to: - 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. DIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Delhi Bench Printed from counselvise.com "