Pooja Sponge Praivate Limited, Sundargarh V. ACIT, Central, Sambalpur

ITA 107/CTK/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Pooja Sponge Private Limited, a company engaged in the manufacture of Sponge Iron, appealing against the order of the CIT(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, for the assessment year 2015-16. The primary contention in the appeal was the disallowance of unsecured loans amounting to Rs.5,70,70,110 under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee argued that it had provided sufficient confirmation letters regarding the loans, which were not adequately considered by the lower authorities. The CIT DR opposed the appeal, asserting that the assessee failed to produce the necessary evidence as required. The Tribunal found procedural inadequacies in the handling of the remand report, particularly the insufficient time granted to the assessee to respond, leading to the decision to remand the matter back to the Assessing Officer.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 300320 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 30-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 01-06-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 68; 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Pooja Sponge Private Limited., IDC, Plot No.214, Kalunga, Rourkela. PAN/GIR No. (Appellant Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, for the assessment year 2. Shri K.K.Bajoria, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri M.K.Gautam, ld CIT DR appeared for the revenue. 3. It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee is a company, which is doing manufacture of Sponge Iron. It assessment came to be completed under section 143(3) of the Act, on 31.12.2016 wherein, unsecured loans of the assessee to an extent of IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.107/CTK/2022 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Pooja Sponge Private Limited., IDC, Plot No.214, Kalunga, Rourkela. Vs. ACIT, Central, Sambalpur PAN/GIR No.AACCP 9822 A (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri K.K.Bajoria, AR Revenue by : Shri M.K.Gautam, Date of Hearing : 31/01 Date of Pronouncement : 31/01 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld 2, Bhubaneswar, dated 23.3.2022 in Appeal No. for the assessment year 2015-16. K.K.Bajoria, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri M.K.Gautam, ld CIT DR appeared for the revenue. It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee is a company, which is doing manufacture of Sponge Iron. It was the submission that the assessment came to be completed under section 143(3) of the Act, on 31.12.2016 wherein, unsecured loans of the assessee to an extent of Page1 | 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACIT, Central, Sambalpur Respondent) a, AR M.K.Gautam, CIT DR 01/2023 /01/2023 This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld in Appeal No. 2/10592/2017-18 K.K.Bajoria, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee is a company, which is was the submission that the assessment came to be completed under section 143(3) of the Act, on 31.12.2016 wherein, unsecured loans of the assessee to an extent of ITA No.107/CTK/2022 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Page2 | 3 Rs.5,70,70,110/- came to be disallowed by invoking the provisions of section 68 of the Act. It was the submission that the assessee had provided the confirmation letters. It was the submission that the ld CIT(A) had without considering the evidences produced by the assessee, dismissed the assessee’s appeal. It was the submission that even though the remand report had been called, the assessee was not given adequate time to produce all the evidences before the AO to substantiate its claim. It was the prayer that the assessee may be given an opportunity to produce all the evidences before the Assessing Officer. 4. In reply, ld CIT DR vehemently opposed the prayer of the assessee. It was the submission that the assessee has failed to produce the evidences as called for. It was the submission that the order of the AO and that of the ld CIT(A) be upheld. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld CIT(A) clearly shows that in the remand report, barely 15 days had been granted. The Assessing Officer is at Sambalpur and the assesse is in Rourkela, which is more than 200 kms. Obviously, the assessee should have been granted adequate opportunity to respond the remand proceedings. This being so, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal must be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for re- adjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity to substantiate its case and we do so. ITA No.107/CTK/2022 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Page3 | 3 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 31/01/2023. Sd/- sd/- (Arun Khodpia) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 31/01/2023 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant : Pooja Sponge Private Limited., IDC, Plot No.214, Kalunga, Rourkela. 2. The Respondent: ACIT, Central, Sambalpur 3. The CIT(A)-2, Bhubaneswar 4. Pr.CIT-2, Bhubaneswar 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy//