DY. CIT, CC-1(4), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD V. MINAL INTERMEDIATES, AHMEDABAD

ITA 594/AHD/2023

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Ahmedabad against Minal Intermediates concerning the assessment year 2016-17. The core issue was the addition of Rs. 2,14,53,435 as unexplained cash credits under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, which the Assessing Officer attributed to unsubstantiated creditors. The CIT(A) deleted this addition, finding the creditors' transactions genuine based on the evidence provided by Minal Intermediates, including account copies, bills, confirmations, proof of payment, and VAT returns. The tribunal's decision affirmed the CIT(A)'s ruling, noting the absence of any adverse remarks or evidence from the Assessing Officer regarding the genuineness of the transactions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 25502 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 16-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 02-08-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: WAGHE PRASAD RAO
• Assessee Lawyers: BIREN SHAH
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.594/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Ahmedabad Vs. Minal Intermediates, Plot No. 1405, GIDC, Phase-IV, Naroda, Gujarat-382330 [PAN No.AAEFM5214A] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Biren Shah, A.R. Respondent by: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 16.10.2024 Date of Pronouncement 16.10.2024 O R D E R PER DR. BRR KUMAR - ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), Ahmedabad, vide order dated 18.05.2023 passed for A.Y. 2016-17. 2. The Revenue has taken the following grounds of appeal:- “1. In the facts on the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and / or on facts in deleting the addition on account of unexplained cash credits of Rs. 2,14,53,435/- made u/s 68 of the Act, considering that, the same are genuine. The Ld. CIT(A) didn’t appreciate the facts that, assessee failed to furnish the supporting evidences before Assessing Officer. 2. In the facts and on the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the AO.” 3. In this case, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 2,14,53,435/- under Section 68 of the Act on account of unsubstantiated creditors. ITA No. 594/Ahd/2023 DCIT vs. Minal Intermediates Asst.Year –2016-17 - 2– 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition holding that the assessee has duly submitted relevant proves like copy of account for the A.Y. 2016-17, copy of the bills, confirmations, proof of payment and VAT return. The Ld. CIT(A) has also categorically held that the original bills of all the purchases for two months have been examined in the remand report by the Assessing Officer and the Assessing Officer has neither made any adverse remarks on the remand report nor any adverse material is brought to notice with regard to the sundry creditors of the goods. The Ld. CIT(A) held that the Assessing Officer in his remand report has accepted the genuinenity of the transactions, therefore, no addition can be made out of the outstanding balances. 5. Having gone through the record before us and also keeping in view the fact that nothing adverse has been brought to our notice and since the remand report has categorically accepted by the genuinenity of the sundry creditors we hold that no addition can be made on the difference in the sundry creditors as alleged by the Assessing Officer. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is hereby affirmed. 6. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 16.10.2024 Sd/- Sd/- (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) (DR. BRR KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 16/10/2024 TANMAY, Sr. PS TRUE COPY ITA No. 594/Ahd/2023 DCIT vs. Minal Intermediates Asst.Year –2016-17 - 3– आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation 16.10.2024 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 16.10.2024 3. Other Member………………… 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S .10.2024 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement .10.2024 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S 16.10.2024 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 16.10.2024 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…………………………………… "