Glottis, CHENNAI V. ACIT Non Corporate Circle 11, CHENNAI

ITA 2661/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5272 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-04-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 07-11-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S VIJAYAPRABHA
• Assessee Lawyers: PAUL SUNDAR RAJ
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . !'# ! , % !& BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.2661/CHNY/2017 ( )( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 M/S GLOTTIS, NEW NO.46 / OLD NO.311, 1 ST FLOOR, THAMBUCHETTY STREET, CHENNAI - 600 001. PAN : AAMFM 1317 L V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE 11, CHENNAI - 600 001. (+,/ APPELLANT) (-.+,/ RESPONDENT) +, / 0 / APPELLANT BY : SHRI PAUL SUNDAR RAJ, CA -.+, / 0 / RESPONDENT BY : MS. S. VIJAYAPRABHA, JCIT 1 / 2% / DATE OF HEARING : 03.04.2018 3') / 2% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26.04.2018 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -13, CHENN AI, DATED 30.03.2017 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. 2 I.T.A. NO.2661/CHNY/17 2. THE ONLY ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS ADDIT ION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE INCOM E-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). 3. WE HEARD SHRI PAUL SUNDAR RAJ, THE LD. REPRESENT ATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE AND MS. S. VIJAYAPRABHA, THE LD. DEPAR TMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE. FROM THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THREE ADDITIONS UND ER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF 37,30,340/- ON ACCOUNT OF NON-RECEIPT OF CONFIRMATION LETTER FROM THE CREDITORS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO MADE AN ADDITION OF 17,65,330/- ON THE GROUND THAT THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF TRANSACTION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ONE MORE ADDITION OF 1,30,79,007/- BEING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. 4. HAVING HEARD THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSE SSEE AND REVENUE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT AN OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO PROV E THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF CREDITORS, GENUINENESS OF THE T RANSACTION AND IDENTITY OF THE CREDITORS. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS BEF ORE THIS TRIBUNAL THAT THE CONFIRMATION LETTER COULD NOT BE FILED SIN CE SOME OF THE CREDITORS LEFT THE BUSINESS AND PREMISES. IF THAT IS SO, THERE IS NO 3 I.T.A. NO.2661/CHNY/17 NECESSITY FOR THE ASSESSEE TO REPAY THE CREDITS. T HE ASSESSEE ALSO CLAIMS THAT SOME OF THE CREDITS WERE REFUNDED TO TH E RESPECTIVE PERSONS. HOWEVER, NO EVIDENCE IS AVAILABLE ON RECO RD. IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED O PINION THAT THE MATTER NEEDS TO BE RE-EXAMINED. ACCORDINGLY, ORDER S OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE SET ASIDE AND THE ADDITIONS M ADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ARE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL RE-EXAMINE TH E MATTER ON THE BASIS OF THE CONFIRMATION LETTERS AND OTHER MATERIA L THAT MAY BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THEREAFTER DECIDE THE ISSUE AFR ESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPO RTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 26 TH APRIL, 2018 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (. !'# ! ) ( . . . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (N.R.S. GANESAN) % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 5 /DATED, THE 26 TH APRIL, 2018. KRI. 4 I.T.A. NO.2661/CHNY/17 / -267 87)2 /COPY TO: 1. +, /APPELLANT 2. -.+, /RESPONDENT 3. 1 92 () /CIT(A)-13, CHENNAI-34 4. PRINCIPAL CIT-8, CHENNAI-34 5. 7: -2 /DR 6. ;( < /GF.