IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1518/HYD/2016 AND S.A. NO. 66/HYD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 ANDHRA BEEDI WORKS, KARIMNAGAR DISTRICT. PAN AAHFA 1402B VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3)(TDS), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI C.S. RAMPRIYADAS REVENUE BY : SMT. SUMAN MALIK DATE OF HEARING : 01-08-2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11-08-2017 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M.: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (A) - 8, HYDERABAD, DATED 12/08/2016 FOR AY 2012-13. 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSES SEE IS MANUFACTURING THE BEEDIES. A SURVEY U/S 133A WAS CO NDUCTED IN THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 10/10/2013. THE AO PASS ED AN ORDER U/S 201(1) AND 201(1A) OF THE IT ACT ON 30/03/2015 RAIS ING A DEMAND OF RS. 25,35,915/- TOWARDS NON DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOU RCE U/SS 194C AND 194J AND INTEREST U/S 201(1A) OF THE ACT. 3. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF AO, THE ASSESSEE PREFE RRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED BEFORE HIM THAT IT HAD PRODUCED INFORMATION AND MATERIAL SOUGHT VIZ., PF RECORD EX TRACTS, BANK STATEMENTS, LEDGER EXTRACTS ETC. ALONG WITH CERTAIN EXPLANATIONS BY THE 2 ITA NO. 1518/H/16 ANDHRA BEEDIES, KARIMNAGAR DT. THEN AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS CONSEQUENT TO THE SURVEY CONDUCTED IN THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSE E FIRM. WHEREAS THE CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEES AR HAD NOT BROUGHT OUT ANY EVIDENCE THAT THE DETAILS/INFORMATION WERE SUBMITTE D BEFORE THE AO FROM THE ASSESSEES OWN RECORD DURING THE APPEAL PR OCEEDINGS. HE, THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SU PREME COURT IN THE CASES OF UMACHARAN SHAW & BROS VS. CIT, 37 ITR 271 AND LALCHANG BHAGAT AMBICA RAM VS. CIT, 37 ITR 288, DISMISSED TH E APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE I S IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THIS APPEAL, LD. AR SU BMITTED THAT INFORMATION RELATING TO VARIOUS QUERIES RAISED BY T HE AO WERE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO ON 01/11/2013 AND ON 18/11/ 2013 BUT THE AO HAS COMPLETED THE PROCEEDINGS U/S 201(1) OF THE ACT CITING THE REASONS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED ANY INF ORMATION AS CALLED FOR. HOWEVER, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE REQ UIRED INFORMATION WAS ALREADY SUBMITTED AND AVAILABLE ON RECORD OF TH E AO AND THE SAME WAS CONFIRMED BY THE LD. DR AFTER VERIFICATION OF THE ASSESSMENT RECORD. 6. CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL FACTS ON RECORD. AS THE REQUIRED INFORMATION WAS FURNISH ED BY THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AO AND THE AO WITHOUT CONSI DERING THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE, PASSED AN ORD ER RAISING A DEMAND U/S 201(1) AND 201(1A), WHICH IS A FACTUAL E RROR. THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND DEEM IT F IT AND PROPER TO REMIT THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH A D IRECTION TO CONSIDER ALL THE INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND C OMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT DE-NOVO. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 6.1 AS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ADJUDICA TED, THE SA FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BECOMES, INFRUCTUOUS, AND THE REFORE, THE SA IS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. 3 ITA NO. 1518/H/16 ANDHRA BEEDIES, KARIMNAGAR DT. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AND SA FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11 TH AUGUST, 2017. SD/- SD/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) (S. RIFAUR RAH MAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACC OUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 11 TH AUGUST, 2017. KV COPY TO:- 1) ANDHRA BEEDI WORKS, C/O C.S. RAMPRIYADAS, B.CO.M , FCA, N-4, NANDANA APARTMENTS, LAKSHMIPURAM, MYSORE 570 004 2) ITO, WARD 1(3), TDS, HYDERABAD. 3) CIT(A) - 8 , HYDERABAD 4) CIT (TDS), HYDERABAD. 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., HYDE RABAD. 6) GUARD FILE