Shri Sanjiv Chandravadan Shah, Vadodara V. The ACIT, Circle-1(2)(1), Vadodara

ITA 253/AHD/2021

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Sanjiv Chandravadan Shah against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which arose from an assessment order under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The primary issue was a reported mismatch between the income disclosed by the assessee and the income reported in Form No. 26AS, amounting to Rs. 14,25,517. The assessee, a doctor, followed a cash system of accounting, whereas the payers used a mercantile basis, leading to the discrepancy. The assessee argued that the difference had been reconciled and the income had been offered to tax in subsequent years. The Department of Revenue did not object to the matter being set aside for fresh adjudication.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 134553 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-02-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 17-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 10-10-2021
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: FORM 26AS
• Section: 28; 143(3)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद ᭠यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI T. R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 253/AHD/2021 िनधाᭅरणवषᭅ/Asstt. Year: 2017-18 Sanjiv Chandravadan Shah 00, URO Care Hospital, URO Care, Hospital, Sainath Marg, Gadapura, Off Old Padra Road, Vadodara, Gujarat-390007 PAN: AFRPS0510H Vs. A.C.I.T, Circle-1(2)(1), Vadodara (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Kishor Parikh, A.R. Revenue by : Ms. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R सुनवाईकᳱतारीख/Date of Hearing : 18/01/2023 घोषणाकᳱतारीख/Date of Pronouncement: 03/02/2023 आदेश/O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi dated 30/09/2021 arising in the matter of assessment order passed under s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as "the Act") relevant to the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: ITA No.253/AHD/2021 A.Y. 2017-18 2 “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld CIT-A has erred in law and merits of the case in not deleting the addition made by the Ld. AO on account of undisclosed receipts of Rs. 1425,517/- under section 28 of the I.T.Act 1961. 2. The appellant craves, leave or reserving the right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any point of time.” 3. At the outset, the Ld. AR before us submitted that there was a mismatch in the income offered by the assessee vis-à-vis the income reported in Form No. 26AS amounting to Rs. 14,25,517/- only. It was the contention of the Ld. AR that the assessee being the Doctor is following cash system of accounting whereas the payers have been maintaining their books of accounts on mercantile basis which has resulted in the mismatch of income disclosed by the assessee vis-à-vis reported in Form 26AS issued by the department. The Ld. AR to this effect has filed the reconciliation statement to demonstrate that difference in the income pointed out by the AO has been offered to tax in the later years and requested to restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication in the light of the reconciliation statement and as per the provisions of law. 4. On the contrary, the Ld. DR raised no objection if the matter is set-aside to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law. 5. Heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, there is a mismatch in income shown by the assessee vis-à-vis the income reported in Form 26 issued by the Revenue. As per the version of the assessee the difference has already been offered to tax in later years. If that be so, if any addition is sustained in the year under consideration that would lead to the double addition which is not desirable under the provisions of the Act. Accordingly, we are inclined to restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication with the direction to verify whether the observation made by the Assessing Officer about the mismatch in the income has been offered to tax by the assessee in the later years. It is also important to note ITA No.253/AHD/2021 A.Y. 2017-18 3 that the benefit of tax credit shall be allowed to the assessee as per the provisions of Section 199 r.w.r. 37BA of the Income Tax Rule. With this observation the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Court on 03/02/2023 at Ahmedabad. Sd/- Sd/- (T. R. SENTHIL KUMAR) (WASEEM AHMED) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 03/02/2023 Tanmay/Manish, Sr. PS TRUE COPY