ACIT, New Delhi V. Sh. Manohar Lal Dureja, New Delhi

ITA 2389/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2926 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 09-10-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 23-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P DAM KANUNJNA
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: E NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDI CIAL MEMBER ITA NO: 2389/DEL/2013 ASSTT. YEAR 2009-10 ACIT VS. MANOHAR L AL DUREJA CIRCLE 38 (1) 8923/2, 1 ST FLOOR, NEW DELHI. MULTANI DHAND A, PAHAR GANJ, NEW DELHI 110 055 PAN AANPD3365L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI RUCHIKA JAIN, CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P.DAM KANUNJNA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 09.10.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 0 1.01.2016 O R D E R PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE DEPARTME NT AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 14.1.203 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) XXVIII, NEW DELHI FOR AY 2009-10. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN TH E BUSINESS OF CIVIL CONSTRUCTION AND HAD FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME ON 29.3.2010. TH E CASE WAS FIXED FOR SCRUTINY THROUGH CASS. IN THE 143(3) ASSESSMENT, THE AO DIS ALLOWED PURCHASE EXPENSES OF RS. 2 LACS TO COVER UP THE POSSIBILITY OF LOSS IN T HE REVENUE ARISING OUT OF UNVERIFIABLE NATURE OF THE EXPENDITURE. FURTHER AN AMOUNT OF RS. 3,98,718/- WAS ADDED BACK TO ITA NO. 2389/DEL/2013 ACIT VS. MANOHAR LAL DUREJA 2 'V* ' THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF TAX DEDUCT ED AT SOURCE BUT NOT INCLUDED BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS TAXABLE INCOME. A THIRD ADDITIO N AMOUNTING TO RS. 19,40,000/- WAS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UN-RECONCILED BALANCE WITH T HE ACCOUNT OF ONE OF THE PARTIES OF THE ASSESSEE M/S. AFCON INFRASTRUCTURE L TD. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALLOWED BY THE LD. CIT (A) AND ALL THE ADDITION S WERE DELETED. NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AND HAS ASSAILED THE ORDER O F THE LD. CIT (A) ON THE DELETION OF ALL THE THREE ADDITIONS. 2. AT THE VERY OUTSET, THE LD. DR POINTED OUT THAT THE THREE ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN DELETED BY THE LD. CIT (A) WITHOUT ANY VERIFICATION AND SUBMITTED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE THE MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED TO THE FIL E OF THE AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, SUPPORTED THE ORD ER OF THE LD. CIT (A) AND SUBMITTED THAT THE SAME SHOULD BE UPHELD. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER. IT IS SEEN THAT THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 2 LA CS ON ACCOUNT OF UNVERIFIABLE PURCHASES DELETED BY THE LD. CIT (A) HAS BEEN MADE WITHOUT GIVING A SPECIFIC FINDING AS TO HOW THE ADDITION WAS ERRONEOUS. IT HAS BEEN M ENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IN PARA 4 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE AS SESSEE HAS NOT MAINTAINED BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND RECORDS PROJECT WISE. WHEREAS, THE LD. CIT (A) HAS MENTIONED IN PARA 4.1 OF HIS ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MAINTAI NED PROPER BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND PURCHASES ARE DULY SUPPORTED BY PURCHASE BILLS. HOW EVER THERE IS NO MENTION THAT THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS HAVING BEEN PRODUCED BEFORE T HE LD. CIT (A) OR FOR THAT MATTER ANY REMAND REPORT HAVING BEEN CALLED FROM TH E AO. SIMILARLY, THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 3983178/- ON ACCOUNT OF TDS HA S BEEN DELETED BY THE LD. ITA NO. 2389/DEL/2013 ACIT VS. MANOHAR LAL DUREJA 3 'V* ' CIT(A) IN PARA 5 OF HIS ORDER BY JUST MENTIONING TH AT THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE SEEMS CORRECT AND IT IS SEEN THAT NO CONCRETE FI NDING HAS BEEN GIVEN BY LD. CIT(A) IN THIS REGARD ALSO. FURTHER STILL, THE DISALLOWANC E OF RS. 19,40,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UN-RECONCILED BALANCE WITH M/S. AFCON INFRASTRUCTUR E LTD. HAS BEEN DELETED AND IN PARA 6.1 THE LD. CIT(A) HAS OBSERVED THAT THE MATER IAL PLACED ON RECORD ON THIS ISSUE WAS EXAMINED BY HER AND IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE DIFFERENCES DO EXIST IN THE AMOUNTS SHOWN BY M/S. AFCON INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. AS PER THE LEDGER ACCOUNT AND AS PER THE TDS RETURN. HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT (A) WHILE DELETING THE ADDITION HAS OBSERVED THAT THE AO SHOULD HAVE PROPERLY PERUSED T HE RECORD AND IN ABSENCE OF PROPER PERUSAL BY THE AO, THE ADDITION OF UN-RECONC ILED BALANCE HAS TO BE DELETED. ON GOING THROUGH THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE LD. CIT (A ) IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS NOT CONSIDE RED AND ADJUDICATED ON ANY THE ISSUES BEFORE HER. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JU STICE WE RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT (A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. THE ASSESSEE WILL BE GIVEN DUE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT ALL SUCH EVIDENCES AND DOCUME NTS AS MAY BE NECESSARY FOR A PROPER ADJUDICATION OF THE CASE. WE ALSO ADD THAT T HE ASSESSEE SHALL EXTEND ALL POSSIBLE COOPERATION FOR AN EARLY DISPOSAL OF THE A PPEAL. 4. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 01. 01.2016. SD/- SD/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) (SUD HANSHU SRIVASTAVA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: THE 1 ST JANUARY, 2016 ITA NO. 2389/DEL/2013 ACIT VS. MANOHAR LAL DUREJA 4 'V* ' VEENA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY. REGISTRAR