GREENBILT INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA V. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 1421/KOL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Greenbilt Industries Pvt. Ltd., which appealed against the orders of the CIT(A) for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The primary issues in the appeal were the additions made by the AO, which included an unexplained cash credit of Rs. 19,35,483 and a disallowance of Rs. 10,39,058 for payments on which TDS was deducted under section 194C of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) upheld these additions, citing the absence of necessary bank statements and explanations for large cash withdrawals prior to the demonetization period. The ITAT, however, found merit in the assessee's request to present additional evidence and thus remitted the case back to the AO for a fresh evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 298583 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Additional evidence; Unexplained cash credit; TDS
• Section: 142(1); 143(2); 194C

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “ A”, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ ए ” BENCH: KOLKATA Įी राजेश क ुमार, लेखा सटèय एवं Įी Ĥदȣप क ुमार चौबे, ÛयाǓयक सदèय क े सम¢ [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member &Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 1421/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Greenbilt Industries Pvt. Ltd. (PAN: AAECG 8082 B) Vs. DCIT, Circle-11(1), Kolkata Appellant / ) अपीलाथȸ ( Respondent / Ĥ×यथȸ Date of Hearing / सुनवाई कȧ Ǔतͬथ 15.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उɮघोषणा कȧ Ǔतͬथ 24.04.2025 For the assessee / Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate For the revenue / राजèव कȧ ओर से Shri Gautam Patra, Addl. CIT DR ORDER / आदेश Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM: This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 26.04.2024 for AY 2017-18 . 2 I.T.A. No. 1421/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Greenbilt Industries Ltd. 2. It appears from the report of the registry that the appeal has been filed after a delay of 2 days for this the assessee has filed condonation petition., which are as follows- 3 I.T.A. No. 1421/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Greenbilt Industries Ltd. On perusal of the condonation petition, the reason for delay in filing the appeal seems to be genuine and bonafide. The Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. Keeping in view, the condonation petition as well as judicial pronouncement that the case should be decided on merit not on technical issue, the delay is hereby condoned. 3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee company filed its return of income for AY 2017-18 declaring total income of Rs. Nil and current year loss of Rs. 3,11,80,348/-. Return was revised on 12.12.2017 for current year loss of Rs. 3,11,80,348/-. The case was selected for compete scrutiny, notice u/s 143(2) was issued. Notice u/s 142(1) of the Act and some other dates were also issued and in response to the same the assessee filed submission along with various documents like books of account audited reports, bank statement and various details time to time. After examining the submission along with balance sheet, profit and loss account the AO has made an addition of Rs. 19,35,483/- considered as unexplained cash credit. The AO has further added an amount of Rs. 10,39,058/- by making disallowance of payment made for which TDS has been deducted u/s 194C of the Act. 4 I.T.A. No. 1421/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Greenbilt Industries Ltd. 4. Aggrieved by the said order the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed on the ground that the assessee has not submitted any bank account statement to shows the large cash withdrawals and no explanation have been offered to tax as to why he had withdrawn and kept such huge amount of cash during the period prior to demonetization period. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the assessee preferred an appeal before us. 5. The Ld. A.R instead of arguing into merit of the case has submitted that an opportunity should be given to the assessee to place his case before the AO. The Ld. Counsel submits that the additional evidence which the assessee could not be placed before the AO are the essential piece of evidence to come into just conclusion of the case hence the assessee should be given an opportunity to place all the documents before the AO with a direction to pass an order after hearing the assessee and going over the documents. 6. Contrary to that the Ld. D.R supports the impugned order but did not raise any objection in remitting the appeal back to the file of AO for fresh adjudication. 7. We have heard the submission of the respective parties. On perusal of the order of AO it appears to us that the assessee was show-caused and asked why the amount deposited Rs. 12,52,372/- should not be considered as unexplained cash credit but the assessee did not reply to this notice. We have also gone through the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and find that the Ld. CIT(A) has also held that the assessee did not submit his bank account statement to shows large cash withdrawals his bank book and cash book to demonstrate that he had enough cash in hand. The Ld. CIT(A) has further held that no explanation has been offered by the assessee as to why he had withdrawn and get such huge amount of cash with him during the period prior to demonetization period. Going over the aforesaid order passed by the lower authorities there is no dispute that the order passed by the AO confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) only on this ground that when the assessee did not offer or submit any documentary evidence in support of its case. 5 I.T.A. No. 1421/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Greenbilt Industries Ltd. 8. Before us the Ld. A.R has filed a petition and submitted that the assessee have documentary evidences which could not be submitted before the lower authorities. According to him, the documents are the essential piece of evidence for just conclusion of the case. He has also filed an Affidavit to this effect which is as follows: 6 I.T.A. No. 1421/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Greenbilt Industries Ltd. 9. Keeping in view the submission and order passed, for the interest of justice, we are inclined to restore the appeal of the assessee to the file of AO for fresh consideration. The AO is directed to consider the additional evidence of the assessee and pass a afresh order. The order passed by the AO confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is hereby set aside. Appeal is remitted back to the file of AO. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 24th April, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Rajesh Kumar/राजेश क ुमार) (Pradip Kumar Choubey /Ĥदȣप क ुमार चौबे) Accountant Member/लेखा सदèय Judicial Member/ÛयाǓयक सदèय Dated: 24th April, 2025 SM, Sr. PS 7 I.T.A. No. 1421/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Greenbilt Industries Ltd. Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Greenbilt Industries Pvt. Ltd. , C/o, Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2nd Floor, Kolkata- 700069. 2. Respondent – DCIT, Circle-11(1), Kolkata 3. Ld. CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. Ld. PCIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail) True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata "