आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री राजेश क ु मार, ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.167/C TK/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Asses s m ent Year : 2016-2 017) AM SB Infra Private Limited, At: Plot No.31(P), Khata No.54, PO/PS: Pokhariput, Bhubaneswar Vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), Cuttack PAN No. :AAKCA 2169 F (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Charan Dass, Sr. DR स ु नवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 09/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 09/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 10.03.2023, passed in ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1050581819(1) for the assessment year 2016-2017. 2. It was the submission of the ld. AR that the issue in the assessee’s appeal was in regard to the confirmation of the assessment order on the issue of disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act on account of non-deduction of TDS in respect of purchases of agricultural land by the assessee. It was the submission that the ld.AO had not considered the fact that the TDS was not liable to be made nor has considered the fact that the payments have been made to multiple persons and in respect of whom TDS is not ITA No.167/CTK/2023 2 liable to be made. It was further submission that the ld. AO has also not considered the fact that the assessee had claimed the purchases of land was not to be considered as an expenditure. It was the further submission that the ld. CIT(A) without considering the evidence produced before him has dismissed assessee’s appeal. 3. In reply, ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the ld. AO and ld. CIT(A). It was the submission of the ld. Sr. DR that the assessee has not appeared before the ld. CIT(A) though multiple opportunities have been given. It was further submitted by the ld. Sr. DR that adequate opportunities had been granted by the AO in the course of assessment proceedings and the assessee has not provided all the details. Thus, it was the prayer that the order of the ld. CIT(A) is liable to be upheld. 4. We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed that the assessee admittedly has not appeared before the ld. CIT(A) and also the assessee has categorically mentioned that the payments have been made to the multiple persons, which is evidenced from the assessment order page 2, wherein the ld. AO has incorporated the name of the payees, from whom the assessee has purchased the land. In the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of AO for readjudication after granting adequate opportunity of being heard. ITA No.167/CTK/2023 3 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 09/10/2023. Sd/- (राजेश क ु मार) (RAJESH KUMAR) Sd/- (जाजज माथन) (GEORGE MATHAN) ऱेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कटक Cuttack; ददनाांक Dated 09/10/2023 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनतलऱपऩ अग्रेपषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशान ु सार/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक/ITAT, Cuttack 1. अऩीऱाथी / The Appellant- AM SB Infra Private Limited, At: Plot No.31(P), Khata No.54, PO/PS: Pokhariput, Bhubaneswar 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent- DCIT, Circle-1(1), Cuttack 3. आयकर आय ु क्त(अऩीऱ) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आय ु क्त / CIT 5. ववभागीय प्रयतयनधध, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक / DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. गार्ज पाईऱ / Guard file. सत्यावऩत प्रयत //True Copy//