M/s. Thar Biotech Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon V. ACIT, Gurgaon

ITA 3019/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7131 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 20-01-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 14-05-2015
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AASISH MOHANTY
• Assessee Lawyers: MOTILAL RANGA
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: H NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEM BER & SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO.3019/DEL /2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR-2008-0 9 THAR BIOTECH PVT. LTD., RAKSHAK HOUSE, 2/220, SOUTH CITY-I, GURGAON (PAN: AACCT0898G) VS ACIT, CIRCLE 2, GURGAON. APPELLANT BY SHRI MOTILAL RANGA , CA RESPONDENT BY S HRI AASISH MOHANTY, SR. DR ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-I, GURGAON VIDE HIS ORDER D ATED 04/03/2015 FOR A.Y. 2008-09 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WAS RIGHT IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,54,061 /- MADE BY THE LD. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME DATE OF HEARING 20.01.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 08.02.2016 I.T.A. NO. 3019/DEL/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 2 TAX, CIRCLE-2, GURGAON TOWARDS VARIOUS EXPENSES WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WAS RIGHT IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF RS. 22,71,464/- MADE BY THE LD. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, GURGAON BY WAY OF DISALLOWANCE OF 50 % OF SUNDRY CREDITORS WITHOUT APPRECIATING MATERIAL O N RECORD. 2. IT IS BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAD CALLED FOR THE REMAND REPORT, WHEREIN IN THE REMAND REPORT THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAD ADMITTED CERTAIN ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. ASSESSING O FFICER IS IN RESPECT OF BALANCES UNDER THE HEAD SUNDRY CREDITOR S WHICH WERE NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY EVIDENCES. IT IS, THEREFORE, NECESSARY TO VERIFY THE GENUINENESS OF THE DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY THE AS SESSEE DURING THE FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. 3. UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDER ED OPINION THAT IN ORDER TO IMPART SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE TO ASSE SSEE, THE MATTER NEEDS TO BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF AO FOR PAS SING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DE NOVO. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE F ILE OF AO TO PASS THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DE NOVO . NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY BE ISSUED PROPER NOTICE AND OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GRANTED TO I.T.A. NO. 3019/DEL/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 3 REPRESENT THE CASE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS FREE TO MAKE ALL THE NECESSARY ENQUIRIES/INVESTIGATION IN RESPECT OF THE SAME. 4. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS STATISTICALLY ALLOWED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08.02. 2016 SD/- SD/- (R.S. SYAL) (BEENA PILLAI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 08 TH FEBRUARY, 2016 GS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI