ACIT Corporate Circle 6(1), CHENNAI V. Sak Industries Private Limited, CHENNAI

ITA 2225/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5151 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 25-07-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G JOHNSON
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJEEV ADITYA M
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Assessment record

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH: CHENNAI , , % BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.2225/CHNY/2018 /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 THE ASST . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE-6(1), CHENNAI. VS. M/S. SAK INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., 27-F, RANJITH ROAD, KOTTURPURAM, CHENNAI 600 085. [PAN: AAGCS 3326Q] ( /APPELLANT) ( '() /RESPONDENT) ) / APPELLANT BY : MR. G. JOHNSON, ADDL. CIT '() /RESPONDENT BY : MR. SANJEEV ADITYA M, CA /DATE OF HEARING : 06.09.2021 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24.09.2021 / O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINS T THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-15 , CHENNAI IN I.T.A NO.66/2016-17/CIT(A)-15 DATED 26.04.2018 RELE VANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS WITH R EGARD TO S. 40A(2)(B) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THE FACTS A RE IN BRIEF THAT THE GROSS RECEIPTS DO NOT TALLY WITH THE INDIVIDUAL TRA NSACTION STATEMENT. I.T.A NO.2166/CHNY/2017 :- 2 -: THE A.O HAS SIMPLY ADDED THE DIFFERENCE WORKED OUT BY HIM. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE TH AT THE ITRS AND SERVICE TAX RETURNS ARE FULLY RECONCILED. THE A.O H AD NOT GIVEN THE BREAK-UP OF ITS AND NO OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO RECONCILE THE DIFFERENCE. THE LD. CIT(A) BY CONSIDE RING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, DIRECTED THE A.O TO VERIFY THE ASS ESSEES RECONCILIATION AND TO DELETE THE ADDITION IF THE ASSESSEES SUBMIS SION IS FACTUALLY CORRECT WITH REFERENCE TO THE ASSESSMENT RECORD. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES, PERUSED THE MATERI ALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITI ES BELOW. IN THIS CASE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS, NEITHER GAVE THE B REAK-UP OF ITS NOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO RECONCILE THE DIF FERENCE CREPT IN THE AIR DATA. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE HAS F URNISHED THE BREAK- UP OF INCOME OFFERED TO TAX AS PER BOOKS OF ACCOUNT S AND INCOME AS PER SERVICE TAX RETURN AND ITS. THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY THE ASSESS EES RECONCILIATION BY GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSE E. THUS, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). A CCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. I.T.A NO.2166/CHNY/2017 :- 3 -: 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IN ITA NO.2225/CHNY/20 18 FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 24 TH SEPTEMBER, 2021 IN CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - ( ) (G. MANJUNATHA) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (V. DURGA RAO) /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, /DATED: 24 TH SEPTEMBER, 2021 . EDN/- /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. ( )/CIT(A) 4. /CIT 5. /DR 6. /GF