Star Consortium, Kolkata V. ITO, WD-43(2), KOLKATA, Kolkata

CO 8/KOL/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6784 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 07-04-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 31-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S M SURANA
• Assessee Lawyers: SUPRIYO PAUL
• Keywords: TDS; FORM 26AS
• Section: 145

Judgement Text

ITA NO.04/KOL/2020 & C.O. NO. 08/KOL/2020 M/S STAR CONSORTIUM, A.Y. 2009-10 1 | P A GE , A , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH: KOL KATA [BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, AM AND SHRI A. T. VARKEY, JM] I.T.A. NO. 04/KOL/2020 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 ITO, WARD-43(2), KOLKATA VS. M/S STAR CONSORTIUM (PAN: ABFFS 1708 K) APPELLANT RESPONDENT C.O. NO. 08/KOL/2020 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A. NO. 04/KOL/2020) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 M/S STAR CONSORTIUM (PAN: ABFFS 1708 K) VS. ITO, WARD-43(2), KOLKATA APPELLANT RESPONDENT DATE OF HEARING 25.03.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 07.04.2021 FOR THE APPELLANT SHRI SUPRIYO PAUL, ADDL. CIT FOR THE RESPONDENT SHRI S. M. SURANA, SR. ADVOCATE ORDER PER SHRI A. T. VARKEY, JM: THIS IS AN APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-13, KOLKAT A DATED 14.10.2019 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. THE MAIN GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE WHICH IT HAS RAISED BY PREFERRING AN APPEAL IS AGAINST THE ACTION OF LD. CIT(A) IN DELET ING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,14,35,593/-/ AND THE ASSESSEE BY PREFERRING CROS S OBJECTION IS AGAINST THE ACTION OF LD. CIT(A) IN ESTIMATING THE NET PROFIT AT 11.17% T O MATCH THE TDS VIS--VIS ADDITIONAL TURNOVER ESTIMATED BY THE AO, WHEN ACCOR DING TO ASSESSEE THE NET PROFIT IT HAD DISCLOSED ON ITS TURN OVER FROM THE SAME SOURCE WHICH WAS ACCEPTED BY BOTH THE LD. CIT(A) & AO IS AT THE TUNE OF 1.22%. ITA NO.04/KOL/2020 & C.O. NO. 08/KOL/2020 M/S STAR CONSORTIUM, A.Y. 2009-10 2 | P A GE 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THIS CASE AS NOTED BY THE AO ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FIRM WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF HANDLING, MAINTAINING, C LEANING OF AIRCRAFTS ETC. THE AO NOTED THAT THE MAIN BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM W AS WITH M/S KINGFISHER AIRLINES LTD. THE AO NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RENDERED SU CH SERVICES TO M/S STAR CONSORTIUM AVIATION SERVICES PVT. LTD. , SPICEJET E TC. THE AO OBSERVED FROM A PERUSAL OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT THAT ASSESSE E HAS SHOWN INCOME AT RS. 3,31,50,625/- FROM AIRCRAFT HANDLING & CLEANING CHA RGES AND OTHER INCOME OF RS. 8,36,938/- TOTALING RS. 3,39,87,563/-. HOWEVER, THE AO NOTED FROM A PERUSAL OF FORM 26AS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT FR OM DIFFERENT SOURCES INCLUDING M/S KINGFISHER AIRLINES WAS AT RS. 5,54,23,156/-. A ND SINCE THERE WAS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE AMOUNT SHOWN AS TURNOVER BY THE ASSESS EE AND AS REFLECTED IN FORM 26AS, THE AO ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE DIFF ERENCE. PURSUANT TO SHOW CAUSE NOTICE (SCN), THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT THE DIFF ERENCE OF RS. 2,14,35,593/- (5,54,23,156/- - 3,39,87,563/-) IS NOT THEIR INCOME AND THEY HAVE NOT UNDERSTATED THEIR INCOME/TURNOVER IN ANYWAY. IT WAS ALSO EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT DISCREPANCY OCCURRED WAS DUE TO WRONG DATA/INFORMATION FILED BY THE PAYEE AIRLINES. FURTHER THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE GROUND HANDLING BUSINESS W AS TAKEN OVER BY M/S STAR CONSORTIUM AVIATION SERVICES PVT. LTD. FROM 01.06.2 008 AND THE ALLEGED AMOUNT RELATES TO THE SAID COMPANY AND NOT TO THEM AND HIG HLIGHTED THE AMOUNT IN FORM 26AS THAT WAS RECEIVED BY THEM FOR RENDERING SERVI CES AS AIRCRAFT HANDLING AND CLEANING CHARGES. THE LD. A.R FURTHER STATED THAT T HEY HAVE NOT CLAIMED ANY CREDIT FOR TDS OF THE BILLS WHICH ARE SHOWN IN FORM 26AS WHICH ARE NOT PART OF THEIR TURNOVER. THE AO ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE ASSESSEE ALSO FURNISHE D SOME COPIES OF THE COMMUNICATIONS IT HAD WITH THE AIRLINES SHOWING TRA NSFER OF BUSINESS AND OTHER RELATED MATTERS. HOWEVER, ACCORDING TO AO THE ASSES SEE DELAYED IN SUBMITTING DETAILS DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND ONLY STARTED APPEARING BEFORE HIM ON 29.11.2011 AND THEREFORE HE DID NOT GET ANY OPPORTU NITY TO CROSS-VERIFY THE VERACITY OF THE CLAIM. THEREFORE, THE AO CONCLUDED THAT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, AS EXTREMELY EVIDENT FROM AN AUTHENTIC SOURCE SUCH AS FORM NO. 2 6AS THE AMOUNT OF RS. 2,14,35,593/- IS CONSIDERED TO HAVE BEEN KEPT CONCE ALED BY THE ASSESSEE THUS ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME AND THEREAFTER HE MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 2,14,35, 593/-. ITA NO.04/KOL/2020 & C.O. NO. 08/KOL/2020 M/S STAR CONSORTIUM, A.Y. 2009-10 3 | P A GE 4. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFOR E THE LD. CIT(A) WHO WAS PLEASED TO DELETE THE ADDITION. HOWEVER SUSTAINED N ET PROFIT (NP) AT 11.17% OF RS. 2,14,35,593/-. THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE DELETION OF RS. 2,14,35,593/- AND THE ASSESSEES CROSS-OBJECTION (CO) IS AGAINST THE ACTION OF LD. CIT(A) IN ESTIMATING NP AT 11.17% OF TURNOVER OF RS. 2,14,35,593/- WHERE AS THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN NP AT 1.22% OF ITS REFLECTED TURNOVER WHICH HAS BEEN ACC EPTED BY THE AO AND LD. CIT(A). 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. WE NOTE THAT THE ASSESSEE FIRM WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF GROUND HANDLING, MAINTAINING, CLEANING OF AIRCRAFTS ETC. ACCORDING TO AO, THE MAIN BUSINES S OF ASSESSEE FIRM WAS WITH M/S KINGFISHER AIRLINES LTD. AND ALSO THE ASSESSEE USED TO RENDER SERVICES TO M/S SPICEJET, M/S STAR CONSORTIUM AVIATION SERVICES PVT. LTD. ETC . THE AO WHILE GOING THROUGH THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN TURNOVER OF RS. 3,31,50,625/- FROM AIRCRAFT HANDLING & MAINTAINING CHARGES AND OTHER INCOME OF RS. 8,36,938/- TOTALING OF RS. 3,39,87,563/- WHEREAS F ORM 26AS REFLECTED THAT ASSESSEE RECEIVED AN AMOUNT OF RS. 5,54,23,156/-. THUS THE A O NOTED THAT THERE WAS A DIFFERENCE OF TURNOVER OF RS. 2,14,35,593/-. THE AO WAS OF THE PRIMA FACIE OPINION THAT THIS DIFFERENCE IN AMOUNT WAS UNDERSTATED INCO ME OF THE ASSESSEE. SO HE CALLED UPON THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE IN INCO ME/TURNOVER. THOUGH THE AO ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED THAT T HE DISCREPANCY HAD HAPPENED DUE TO WRONG DATA/INFORMATION FILED BY THE PAYEES/M/S K INGFISHER AIRLINES IN FORM 26AS AND THAT THE GROUND HANDLING BUSINESS WAS TAKEN OVE R BY M/S STAR CONSORTIUM AVIATION SERVICES PVT. LTD. FROM THE ASSESSEE FIRM ON 01.06.2008 ONWARDS; AND THE SAID AMOUNT (RS. 2,14,35,593/-) RELATES TO THE SAID COMPANY [M/S STAR CONSORTIUM AVIATION SERVICES PVT. LTD.] FOR RENDERING SERVICE TO M/S KINGFISHER. AND IT WAS POINTED OUT TO THE AO THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVE D FROM M/S KINGFISHER AIRLINES THE AMOUNT FOR AIRCRAFT CLEANING CHARGES ONLY AND OTHER REMITTANCE MUST BE WRONGLY SHOWN AS REMITTED TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE FORM 26AS, WHEREAS IT MUST HAVE BEEN PAID BY M/S KINGFISHER AS THE GROUND HANDLING CHARGES PA ID TO M/S STAR CONSORTIUM AVIATION SERVICES PVT. LTD.. IN ORDER TO SUPPORT IT S CONTENTION THE ASSESSEE ALSO ITA NO.04/KOL/2020 & C.O. NO. 08/KOL/2020 M/S STAR CONSORTIUM, A.Y. 2009-10 4 | P A GE FURNISHED COPIES OF COMMUNICATION IT HAD WITH M/S K INGFISHER AIRLINES AS WELL AS DOCUMENTS TO SUBSTANTIATE THE TRANSFER OF BUSINESS OF GROUND HANDLING FROM 01.06.2008 ON WARDS TO M/S STAR CONSORTIUM AVIATI ON SERVICES PVT. LTD.. HOWEVER, THE AO WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THERE WAS NO TIME/OP PORTUNITY FOR HIM TO CROSS-VERIFY THESE FACTS DUE TO PAUCITY OF TIME AND THEREFORE HE MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 2,14,35,593/-. ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DELETE D THE ADDITION, AFTER TAKING NOTE THAT AO HAS FIRST RAISED THE MISMATCH BETWEEN THE T URNOVER SHOWN IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND FORM 26AS ONLY ON 07.12.2011 AND T HE ASSESSEE PURSUANT TO THE SAME DULY RESPONDED ON 13.12.2011 IN RESPECT OF MIS MATCH. THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE AOS CONTENTION THAT HE COULD NOT CROSS-VERIFY THE VERACITY OF THE FACTS BROUGHT TO HIS NOTICE SINCE T HE ASSESSEE HAD DELAYED IN GIVING REPLY DOES NOT HAVE MERITS BECAUSE THE AO HAS PASSE D THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ON 14.12.2011 WHEN THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE SCN IN RE SPECT OF MISMATCH AT THE FIRST INSTANCE WAS RAISED BY THE AO ONLY ON 07.12.2011 AN D SINCE THE ASSESSEE REPLIED TO IT VIDE LETTER DATED 13.12.2011, IT DOES NOT LIE IN THE MOUTH OF THE AO TO SAY THAT THE ASSESSEE DELAYED IN GIVING REPLY IN RESPECT OF MISM ATCH. AND WE AGREE WITH THE SAID FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) BECAUSE THE AO RAISED TH E QUESTION OF DIFFERENCE OF TURNOVER FROM THE P & L ACCOUNT FILED BY THE ASSESS EE AND THE FORM 26AS ONLY ON 07.12.2011 AND THE ASSESSEE REPLIED TO AO ON 13.12. 2011, THAT I.E. WITHIN SIX (6) DAYS, WHICH IS A REASONABLE PERIOD TO REPLY TO SCN. AND THEREAFTER ON 14.12.2011 THE AO PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. SO HE CANNOT BLAME THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT GIVING HIM TIME TO CROSS-VERIFY THE CONTENTION/EXPLANATION GIV EN BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT TO THE MISMATCH AS DISCUSSED SUPRA. SO WE CONCUR WITH THE LD. CIT(A) ON THIS FINDING. 6. IT IS NOTED THAT WHILE EXPLAINING THE MISMATCH, THE ASSESSEE HAS BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE AO THAT EVEN THOUGH THE ASSESSEE FIRM WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF GROUND HANDLING, MAINTAINING, CLEANING OF AIRCRAFTS ETC. FROM 01.06.2008 ONWARDS, THE GROUND HANDLING BUSINESS WAS TAKEN OVER BY THE M/S STAR CONSORTIUM AVIATION SERVICES PVT. LTD. AND THEREFORE ACCORDING TO ASSES SEE FIRM, THE INCOME/PAYMENT IN RESPECT OF SERVICES RENDERED IN RESPECT OF GROUND H ANDLING BUSINESS FOR M/S KINGFISHER AIRLINES MIGHT HAVE BEEN WRONGLY SHOWN B Y KINGFISHER AIRLINES TO HAVE ITA NO.04/KOL/2020 & C.O. NO. 08/KOL/2020 M/S STAR CONSORTIUM, A.Y. 2009-10 5 | P A GE BEEN WRONGLY CREDITED IN FORM 26AS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM INSTEAD OF THE M/S STAR CONSORTIUM AVIATION SERVICES PVT. LTD. IN ORDER TO SUPPORT ITS CONTENTION/EXPLANATION THE ASSESSEE FIRM PLACED BEFORE THE AO THE COMMUNIC ATION BETWEEN IT (THE ASSESSEE FIRM AND M/S KINGFISHER AIRLINES). FROM A PERUSAL O F E-MAIL COPY BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE FIRM, M/S STAR CONSORTIUM AVIATION SERVICE S PVT. LTD. AND M/S KINGFISHER AIRLINES SHOWS THAT THERE WERE NUMEROUS COMMUNICATI ONS BETWEEN THESE THREE PARTIES FOR AY 2008-09 GOING UP TO OCTOBER/NOVEMBER , 2009. THE LD. CIT(A) NOTES THAT FROM THE CONTENTS OF THESE COMMUNICATION BETWE EN THE PARTIES, IT APPARENT THAT THERE WAS A GOOF UP IN THE OFFICE OF M/S KINGFISHER AIRLINES IN RESPECT OF FILLING UP OF TDS FORM 26AS, PAN RELEVANT FOR M/S STAR CONSORTIUM AVIATION SERVICES PVT. LTD. AND NON-ISSUE OF TDS CERTIFICATES ETC TO THE PARTI ES CONCERNED INCLUDING THAT OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM. THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO NOTED THAT THE A SSESSEE HAD BROUGHT THIS FACT TO THE NOTICE OF AO THAT GOOF-UP TOOK PLACE IN THE OFF ICE OF TDS DEDUCTOR (M/S KINGFISHER AIRLINES LTD.) WHILE FILLING THE FROM 26 AS AS REGARDS THE ASSESSEES PAN HAVING BEEN ENTERED WRONGLY POSTED AFTER 01.06.200 8 DURING WHICH PERIOD THE SERVICES WERE NOT CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN RENDERED BY THE ASSESSEE FIRM AND THE RELEVANT BILLS ARE NOT CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE FIRM ON THE AIRLINES. HAVING BROUGHT THESE INFORMATION TO THE N OTICE OF THE AO AND SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS ABLE TO PROVE THAT THE BUSINESS OF GRO UND HANDLING SERVICES WAS TRANSFERRED TO M/S STAR CONSORTIUM AVIATION SERVICE S PVT. LTD. FROM 01.06.2008 ONWARDS; AND THERE WAS A GOOF UP IN THE OFFICE OF T DS DEDUCTOR (KINGFISHER AIRLINES) WHILE THEY WERE FILLING UP 26AS BY WRONGL Y ENTERING THE PAN, ACCORDING TO LD. CIT(A) THE AO WAS DUTY BOUND TO VERIFY THE VERA CITY OF THE CLAIM SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS PLACED ENOUGH MATERIAL BEFORE THE AO T O SUPPORT ITS CONTENTION/EXPLANATION IN RESPECT OF MISMATCH OF RS . 2.14 CRORES WHICH ASSESSEE FIRM DENIED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY IT. TAKING NOT E OF ALL THESE FACTS, THE LD. CIT(A) HAD EVEN ISSUED A LETTER TO KINGFISHER AIRLI NES ON 04.09.2019 SEEKING CLARIFICATION ABOUT THE FORM 26AS/TDS CREDIT AGAINS T THE ASSESSEES PAN. HOWEVER THE LD. CIT(A) NOTES THAT THE SAID LETTER WAS RETUR NED BACK WITH POSTAL REMARK LEFT . SO THE LD. CIT(A) NOTES THAT IT IS DIFFICULT TO CON CLUDE THE INFORMATION IN RESPECT OF ITA NO.04/KOL/2020 & C.O. NO. 08/KOL/2020 M/S STAR CONSORTIUM, A.Y. 2009-10 6 | P A GE TDS AMOUNT SHOWN IN FORM 26AS FROM THE TDS DEDUCTOR AS CONCLUSIVE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED AS UND ER: 4.16. SINCE THE INCOME HAS BEEN ADDED, THE AO IS L EGALLY REQUIRED TO PROVE THAT THE SAID INCOME ACCRUED TO THE APPELLANT OR WAS RECEIVED BY IT. THE BURDEN IS ON THE AO TO PROVE THE ALLEGED FACT. ON THE CONTRARY IN THE ASSESSMENT PRO CEEDINGS, THE AO DEMANDED THE APPELLANT TO PROVE THAT THE AMOUNT APPEARING IN FORM 26AS DID NOT BELONG TO THE APPELLANT. IN ANY CASE, IT IS DIFFICULT TO PROVE THE NEGATIVE FOR THE APPELLANT, WHO SEEMS TO HAVE SUBMITTED GOOD AMOUNT OF PAPERS TO THE AO TO SUPPORT ITS CASE ON THE ISSUE CONCERNED. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE APPELLATE ORDER, I HOLD THAT THE AO HAS PROCEED ED WITHOUT ANY MATERIAL TO HOLD THAT THE APPELLANT HAD EARNED RS. 2,14,35,593/-. I FURTHER HOLD THAT FORM 26AS ALONE CANNOT LEAD TO ADDITION OF INCOME IF CLAIMS ARE MADE OF WRONG DATA ENTRY/INFORMATION AND LACK OF CORRESPONDING SERVICES BY THE DEDUCTEE TO THE DEDUC TOR. WITH THE AFORESAID OBSERVATION THE LD. CIT(A) WAS PLEASED TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS. 2.14 CRORES. THEREAFTER THE LD. CIT(A) ESTIMAT ED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, WHICH ACCORDING TO HIM SHOULD BE NET PROFIT (NP) O F 11.17% OF RS. 2,14,35,593/- (DIFFERENCE FIGURE); AND AGAINST THIS ACTION OF LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE US CONTENDING THAT EVEN IF ADDITION IS MADE, THE NP SH OULD BE ONLY 1.22% SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN NP ON ITS TURNOVER OF RS. 3,31,5 0,625/- WHICH HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE AO AS WELL AS LD. CIT(A). WE NOTE THAT ONLY BECAUSE THERE IS A MISMATCH BETWEEN TDS CERTIFICATE (26AS) AND TURNOVER SHOWN B Y THE ASSESSEE IN ITS P& L ACCOUNT CANNOT BE THE SOLE BASIS ON WHICH THE ENTI RE ADDITION OF THE DIFFERENCE COULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO TAX. THEREFORE, ON THE FACTS A ND CIRCUMSTANCES DISCUSSED ABOVE WE FIND THE VIEW OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO BE A PLAUSIBL E VIEW AND ACCORDINGLY HIS ACTION OF DELETING RS. 2,14,35,593/- IS CONFIRMED AND THER EFORE, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. 7. COMING TO THE PARTIAL CONFIRMATION MADE BY THE L D. CIT(A) BY RESORTING TO ESTIMATION OF NP AT 11.17% OF THE DIFFERENCE IN AMO UNT/TURNOVER AT RS. 2,14,35,593/- WE NOTE THAT WHILE DOING SO I.E. WHILE EXERCISING H IS CO-TERMINUS POWER IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS HE COULD HAVE DONE SO AS PER LAW MEANING WHEN HE PROPOSED TO ESTIMATE THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, THE LD. CIT (A) SHOULD HAVE FIRST OF ALL REJECTED THE AUDITED BOOKS OF ACCOUNT PRODUCED BY T HE ASSESSEE IN ACCORDANCE TO SECTION 145 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTE R REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) WHICH THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT ADMITTEDLY DONE. SO THE ESTI MATION OF LD. CIT(A) FAILS BEING BAD IN LAW. THEREFORE WE DIRECT THE DELETION OF ES TIMATED AMOUNT. ITA NO.04/KOL/2020 & C.O. NO. 08/KOL/2020 M/S STAR CONSORTIUM, A.Y. 2009-10 7 | P A GE 8. HOWEVER BEFORE PARTING IN INTEREST OF THE REVENU E, IT IS NOT THAT ASSESSEES CASE IS THAT IT HAS NOT CLAIMED THE CREDIT FOR RS. 2.14 CRORES, IF THAT IS SO, THEN THE PRESUMPTION IS THAT THE CORRESPONDING RECEIPT OF RS . 2.14 CRORES IS NOT BELONGING TO ASSESSEE. IF THAT FACT IS CORRECT, THEN NO ADDITION IS WARRANTED. HOWEVER, ON EXAMINATION IF IT IS FOUND THAT ASSESSEE HAS CLAIME D CREDIT FOR TDS OF RS. 2.14 CRORES THEN THE AO IS DIRECTED TO ASSESS THE INCOME ELEMEN T EMBEDDED IN THESE RECEIPT WHICH IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE IS N.P. OF 1 .22%. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED AND CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 7 TH APRIL, 2021. SD/- SD/- (J. SUDHAKAR REDDY) (A. T. VARKEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 07.04.2021 SB, SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT- ITO, WARD-43(2), KOLKATA 2. RESPONDENT M/S STAR CONSORTIUM, 26, R. B. C. ROAD , 2 ND FLOOR, DUM DUM, KOLKATA-700028. 3. THE CIT(A)- 13, KOLKATA (SENT THROUGH E-MAIL) 4. CIT- , KOLKATA 5. DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA (SENT THROUGH E-MAIL) TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA