M/s. Gensys Technologies Pvt.Ltd, Pune V. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle - 1(2), Pune

ITA 12/PUN/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0287 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-07-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 06-01-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं. / ITA No.12/PUN/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/s. Gensys Technologies Pvt. Ltd., 4 th Floor, “Devgiri”, Plot No.14, S.No.17/1B, Kothrud, Pune – 411038 PAN: AACCG5346C .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिधम / V/s. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(2), Pune ......प्रत्यथी / Respondent Assessee by : Mrs JR Chandekar Revenue by : Shri S.P. Walimbe स ु नवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 11-07-2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 12-07-2022 आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune-1, dated 31.08.2017 for the assessment year 2014-15 2. At the outset, we find that there is delay of 428 days in filing the present appeal. The appellant has filed an affidavit stating that the delay in filing the present appeal had occurred, as the Director of the company AniruddhaMadhav Dike was busy in attending his parents suffering from 2 ITA No.12/PUN/2019 M/s. Gensys Technologies Pvt. Ltd. cancer since 2016 and as a result of which, he could not attend to the affairs of the company. Consequently, there was a delay of 428 days in filing the present appeal. The averments made in the affidavit were not controverted by the Revenue. We also find that in the preceding assessment years 2013-14 and 2012-13, similar delay was condoned by this Tribunal in ITA Nos.13 & 14/PUN/2019. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case are as under: The appellant is a company incorporated under the provisions of The Companies Act, 1956. It is engaged in providing end to end design consultancy services and construction services, to Govt. and Pvt. Sector entities at national and International level. The return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 was filed on 29.11.2014 declaring total income of Rs.33,71,660/-. The assessment against the said return of income was completed by the Assessing Officer at Rs.82,11,890/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer had made several additions which include the addition on account of difference in gross receipts shown in the Profit and Loss Account and as per Form No.26AS of Rs.45,64,165/-, with which we are concerned. 4. The brief background of the case is as under: During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer found discrepancies between the gross receipts shown as per the books of account and Form No.26AS. When the appellant was called upon to explain the discrepancies, the appellant had failed to reconcile the same. 3 ITA No.12/PUN/2019 M/s. Gensys Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer had brought to tax a sum of Rs.45,64,165/-. 5. Being aggrieved by the addition, an appeal was preferred before the CIT(A). During the course of proceedings before the CIT(A), the appellant had filed statement of reconciliation which is extracted by the CIT(A) vide para 6 of the CIT(A)’s order. However, the CIT(A) was not satisfied with the reconciliation to the extent of Rs.12,60,953/-. However, the CIT(A) remanded the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer to examine the statement of reconciliation filed before him with a direction to restrict the amount of disallowance to the extent of unreconciled, after due verification. Being aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the appellant is before us against the direction of CIT(A) affirming the disallowance of Rs.12,60,953/-. Even before us, the appellant had not filed any reconciliation. Accordingly, we do not find any reason to interfere with the orders of CIT(A). Hence, the appeal filed by the appellant stands dismissed. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 13 th July, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI INTURI RAMA RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ऩ ु णे / Pune; ददनाांक / Dated : 13 th July, 2022 GCVSR 4 ITA No.12/PUN/2019 M/s. Gensys Technologies Pvt. Ltd. आदेश की प्रनिलऱपप अग्रेपषि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to : 1. अऩीऱाथी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent; 3. आयकर आय ु क्त(अऩीऱ) / The CIT(A), Pune-1; 4. The Pr.CIT-1, Pune 5. ववभागीय प्रतततनधध, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, ऩ ु णे “A” / DR ‘A’, ITAT, Pune; 6. गार्ड पाईऱ / Guard file. आदेशान ु सार / BY ORDER, //सत्यावऩत प्रतत// True Copy// वररष्ठ तनजी सधिव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, ऩ ु णे / ITAT, Pune