VENKATASATYANARAYANA CHOWDARY YALAMANCHILI , HYDERABAD V. ACIT Circle-6 (1), HYDERABAD

ITA 221/Hyd/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0905 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-07-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Next Hearing Date: 04-07-2024
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 06-03-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CH RAJESWARA REDDY
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 43B; 40A(3); 143(1); 43

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ मŐ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G., ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA No. 221/Hyd/2024 (िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Venkateasatyanarayana Chowdary Yalamanchili, Hyderabad [PAN : AAIPY8466E] Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1), Hyderabad अपीलाथŎ / Appellant Ů̝ यथŎ / Respondent िनधाŊįरती Ȫारा/Assessee by: Advocate S.K. Gupta राज̾ व Ȫारा/Revenue by: Shri CH Rajeswara Reddy, DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 04/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement on:18/07/2024 आदेश / ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M: Aggrieved by the order dated 30/01/2024 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NaƟonal Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”), in the case of Venkatasatyanarayana Chowdary Yalamanchili (“the assessee”) for the assessment year 2018-19, the assessee preferred this appeal. Page 2 of 3 2. Assessee is an individual and proprietor of a cinema theatre. He filed his return of income for the assessment year 2018-19 on 5/10/2018 declaring an income of ₹ 2, 76, 580/-. While processing the return under secƟon 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”), CPC Bangalore made disallowance of ₹ 1, 08, 50, 577/-under secƟon 40A(3) of the Act and another sum of ₹ 11, 13, 507/- under secƟon 43B of the act. 3. Assessee preferred appeal. Based on the audit report learned CIT(A) held that the CPC rightly disallowed under secƟon 40A(3) of the Act. He further held that the disallowance under 43 B of the Act is also consistent with the facts on record. 4. Ld. AR submits that the authoriƟes have taken only a part of the audit report to be found at column 21 (d) only in part and failed to noƟce the laƩer part by the auditors have cerƟfied that according to the test checks of the cash book and the cheque, record slips etc., as a reasonable, considering the size of the form, there has been no Revenue payments in cash which are inadmissible under secƟon 40 A (3), 40 A (3A) read with rule 6 DD. He submits that the disclaimer is only a formality and nothing prevented the authoriƟes from verifying the books of the assessee. In respect of the other disallowance Ld. AR submits that the assessee submiƩed before the learned CIT(A) that the amounts represenƟng the GST was paid before the due date in respect of the months from August, 2007 to December, 2007 but it is only in respect of the payments towards the months of January to March, 2018 that were delayed. 5. Ld. DR placing heavy reliance on the orders of the authoriƟes below. 6. We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions made on either side. Whether or not there are any Revenue payments in cash, de hors the disclaimer clause is a verifiable fact and merely because the auditors put a disclaimer clause it does not prevent the verificaƟon of books to know whether or not there are any cash payments. Merely Page 3 of 3 because there is a disclaimer no addiƟon could be made without proper verificaƟon of the books. So also, the payments towards GST as pleaded by the assessee before us. We, therefore, find it just and proper to set aside the impugned order and restored the issue to the file of the learned Assessing Officer to cause enquiry on this verifiable facts and to take a plausible view according to law. With this view of the maƩer, we set aside the impugned order and direct the lemon learned Assessing Officer to verify the books and reach a conclusion according to law on this two aspects. Grounds are accordingly treated as allowed for staƟsƟcal purpose. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for staƟsƟcal purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on this day the 18 th July, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- (MANJUNATHA G.) (K. NARASIMHA CHARY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 18/07/2024 Pvv/SPS Copy forwarded to: 1.Venkatasatyanarayana Chowdary Yalamanchili D.No.8-2-293/k/58, Plot No.58, Phase III Kamalapuri Colony, Hyderabad 500073, Telangana Hyderabad. 2. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1), Hyderabad. 3. Pr.CIT , Hyderabad. 4. DR, ITAT, Hyderabad. 5. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY