M/s. Waltask Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., Meerut V. ACIT, Meerut

ITA 263/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6697 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 13-01-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BHARAT BHUSHAN GARG
• Assessee Lawyers: RK GARG
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH MEERUT CAMP, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.C.SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 263/DEL ./2015 ASSESSMENT Y EAR : 2007-08 WALTASK PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LTD. VS. ACI T C-5, CIRCLE-2 PANDAB NAGAR MEERUT MEERUT PAN : AAACW7282P ASSESSEE BY : SHRI R.K.GARG, ADV. REVENUE BY : SHRI BHARAT B HUSHAN GARG, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 17/12/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29 .02.2016 ORDER PER I.C.SUDHIR, J.M. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGA INST ORDER OF CIT(A)- MEERUT DATED 28.11.2014 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. IN THE GROUNDS RAISED, THE ASSESSEE HAS QUE STIONED ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN NOT ALLOWING THE APPLICATION FOR ADMISSIO N OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES MOVED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER RULE 46A REGA RDING UNSECURED LOAN OF RS. 50,000/- AND OUTSTANDING SUNDRY CREDITO RS AT RS. 1,70,286/-. ITA NO.263/DEL/2015 WALTASK PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LT D. 2 3. IN SUPPORT OF THE GROUND, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT REASON FOR NON-FURNISHING OF THESE EVIDE NCES IN THE SHAPE OF CONFIRMATION OF UNSECURED LOAN FROM RAJIV ARYA EXP ENSES PAYABLE AND SECURITY OUTSTANDING TOTALING TO RS. 1,70,286/-, IN CURRING OF EXPENSES OF PURCHASE ADMINISTRATION, SELLING AND OTHER EXPENSE S AT RS. 3,93,030/-, AND TRADE TAX ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2 006-07, 2007-08 AND 2008-09. THESE EVIDENCES COULD NOT BE PRODUCED BEFO RE THE ASSESSING OFFICER BECAUSE DURING THAT PERIOD THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE WAS CLOSED DOWN AND ASSESSEE WAS IN SERVICE OUTSIDE MEERUT, TH US, HE WAS UNABLE TO COMPLY AND FILE THE EVIDENCE, WHICH WERE NECESSARY FOR THE ADJUDICATION OF THE ISSUES. THE LD. AR CONTENDED FURTHER THAT EN TIRE LIABILITY SIDE ALONGWITH ENTIRE EXPENDITURE INCURRED HAVE BEEN TRE ATED AS UNEXPLAINED CREDIT/BOGUS EXPENSES, IN THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S 144 OF THE ACT. HE REFERRED PAGE NOS. 26 TO 33 OF THE PAPER BOOK WHICH ARE COPIES OF CONFIRMATION OF LOAN FROM RAJEEV AHLUWALI, DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY, ALONG WITH COPY OF CAPITAL ACCOUNT AND HDFC BANK AC COUNT FROM WHICH LOAN AMOUNT WAS GIVEN TO THE COMPANY; TDS CHALLAN O F RS. 868 PAID ON 24.5.2007, AUDIT FEE PAYABLE, VAT CHALLAN OF RS. 1, 041/- PAID ON 25.4.2007; CONFIRMATION OF SECURITY FROM BHAWANI ME DICINE CENTRE, AS APPEARING IN BALANCE SHEET ON 31.3.2006 AND 31.3.20 07 AND CONFIRMATION FROM KUKRETI MEDICAL TRADERS AS APPEARING IN THE BA LANCE ON 31.3.2006 AND 31.3.2007. 4. THE LD. SR. DR ON THE OTHER HAND OPPOSED T HE ABOVE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE WITH THIS CONTENTION THAT MORE THAN SU FFICIENT TIME WAS GIVEN BY THE AO TO ESTABLISH THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE TO WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS THOROUGHLY FAILED, HENCE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIF IED IN REJECTING THE ITA NO.263/DEL/2015 WALTASK PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LT D. 3 APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ADMISSION OF THE AD DITIONAL EVIDENCES MOVED UNDER RULE 46A. 5. HAVING GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUT HORITIES BELOW, WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS REJECTED THE APPLICATION M OVED UNDER RULE 46A BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVI DENCES MAINLY ON THE BASIS THAT THE AO HAD GIVEN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PURPOSE. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAI NED THE CIRCUMSTANCES, AS DISCUSSED ABOVE UNDER WHICH THE A SSESSEE COULD NOT FURNISH THE ABOVE STATED EVIDENCES BEFORE THE ASSES SING OFFICER. THERE IS NO REASON WITH US TO DOUBT THOSE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND IN OUR VIEW THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES FOR THE ASSESSEE WAS SUFFI CIENT FOR NON- FURNISHING OF THE ABOVE STATED EVIDENCES BEFORE THE AO AND THE ASSESSMENT WAS ULTIMATELY PASSED U/S 144 OF THE IT ACT. WE ARE, THUS, OF THE VIEW THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN R EJECTING THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE, WHICH HAS BEEN MADE AVAILABLE AT P AGE NO. 21 OF THE PAPER BOOK AS THESE EVIDENCES WERE ALSO NECESSARY F OR THE ADJUDICATION OF THE ISSUES OF UNSECURED LOAN AND OUTSTANDING SUN DRY CREDITOR. WE, THUS, WHILE ALLOWING THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESS EE FOR THE ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES MENTIONED HEREINABOVE SET ASID E THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE ABOVE ISSUES AFRESH AFTER AFFORDING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD T O THE ASSESSEE. THE GROUNDS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA NO.263/DEL/2015 WALTASK PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LT D. 4 (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 29/02/2016). SD/- SD/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (I.C.SUDHIR) ACCOUNTANT MEMEBR JUDICIAL MEM BER DATED: 29/ 02/2016 *BINITA* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 5. ITA NO.263/DEL/2015 WALTASK PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LT D. 5 DATE INITIAL 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 24.02.2016 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 24.02.2016 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON 29.02.2016 PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.