DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR, AHMEDABAD V. SAVVY INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, S. G HIGHWAY AHMEDABAD

ITA 2021/AHD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 4(1)(1), Ahmedabad as the appellant and Savvy Infrastructure Pvt Ltd as the respondent. The dispute centered on the disallowance of Rs 1,21,93,308 claimed by the assessee as a loss under 'Other Expenses' related to the 'Sierra Project' in the Assessment Year 2017-18. The Assessing Officer initially disallowed the claim, treating it as unexplained expenditure under Section 69C of the Income-tax Act, 1961. However, the Ld. CIT(A) reversed this decision after reviewing the evidence provided by the assessee. The Revenue's appeal to the Tribunal contested the admission of additional evidence by the assessee and the deletion of the disallowance.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 793541 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 29-11-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B.P. SRIVASTAVA
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRUNJAL SHAH
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Corroborative evidences; Unexplained expenditure
• Section: 143(3); 69C

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT MS. SUCHITRA R. KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2021/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 4(1)(1), Ahmedabad Vs. Savvy Infrastructure Pvt Ltd., B-900, Shapath-4, Opp. Karnavati Club, SG Highway, Ahmedabad-380051 [PAN : AACCS 1428 B] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr DR Respondent by: Ms. Shrunjal Shah, AR Date of Hearing 22.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement 23.09.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)” for short), under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short), relating to the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal :- “a) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs 1,21,93,308/- made by AO on account of disallowance of Sierra Project Loss expenses claimed in P & L A/c treated as unexplained expenses u/s. 69C of IT Act despite the fact that :- (i) the assessee did not submit any documents regarding claimed expenses during assessment proceedings. (ii) During appellate proceedings, the assessee has submitted documents in proof of payment to Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation only of Rs.20,05,468/-. (iii) The Ld. CIT(A) in the appeal order has nowhere mentioned that the assessee has submitted documents as proof of expenses claimed of Rs. 1,21,93,308/- b) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in admitting additional evidences filed by assessee without calling for remand report from AO.” Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2021/Ahd/2024 DCIT Vs. Savvy Infrastructure Pvt Ltd Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 2– 3. The brief facts of the case are that assessee is a company engaged in the business of real estate development. It filed its return of income for the year under consideration on 31.10.2017 declaring total income of Rs. 1,99,420/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act. During the assessment, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had claimed Rs. 1,21,93,308/- as a loss under “Other Expenses” in respect of the “Sierra Project.” Thereafter, the Assessing Officer passed an assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 23.12.2019, disallowing the said loss and treating it as unexplained expenditure under Section 69C of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the ledgers, vouchers, and supporting evidence submitted by the assessee, deleted the impugned addition. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. Before us, the Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer. The Ld. AR, on the other hand, supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the impugned disallowance after considering the ledgers, vouchers, and supporting evidences which were placed before the Ld. CIT(A). We also find that Page No. 95 of the Paper Book which contained a group summary of direct Sierra Project expenses for FY 2015– 16, sufficiently establish the genuineness and business nexus of the expenditure, coupled with assessee’s explanation that the remaining expenses were incurred Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2021/Ahd/2024 DCIT Vs. Savvy Infrastructure Pvt Ltd Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 3– in FY 2016–17 and together constituted the full loss claimed. We, therefore, decline to interfere with the well-reasoned order of the Ld. CIT(A). 8. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 23.09.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA R. KAMBLE) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT Ahmedabad; Dated 23.09.2025 **btk आदेश की \u0007ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\u0007 / The Appellant 2. \b थ\u0007 / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु\u0015 / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु\u0015(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय \bितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, True Copy सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation … Words processed by Hon’ble VP on his PC on 22.09.2025 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member …..22.09.2025 3. Other Member …..22.09.2025 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S …..22.09.2025 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement …..23.09.2025 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S …..23.09.2025 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk …..23.09.2025 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order 10. Date of Dispatch of the Order…………………………………… Printed from counselvise.com "