SAV Logistics Limited, New Delhi V. ACIT Circle 22(2), New Delhi

ITA 3649/DEL/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6787 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-05-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 29-05-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 13-12-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJAN MALIK
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 68; 143(3)

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.3649/Del/2023, A.Y. 2017-18) SAV Logistics Limited H. No. Z-315, Prem Nagar, Kashmiri Colony Nazafgarh, New Delh- 110043 PAN: AARCS8621B Vs. ACIT, Circle 22(2), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Rajan Malik, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Anuj Garg, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 30/05/2024 Date of Pronouncement 31/05/2024 ORDER PER AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, AM This appeal of the Assessment Year [In Short, the ‘AY’] 2017-18 preferred by the assessee is against the order dated 18.10.2023 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), New Delhi [In Short, the ‘CIT(A)’]. The impugned order is challenged before us on the issue of non- ITA No.3649/Del/2023 2 maintainability being bad in law as it was passed in limine and not on the merit of the case. 2. The relevant facts of the case giving rise to this appeal are that the appellant/assessee, engaged in the business of freight forwarding and logistics services, filed its Income Tax Return (In short, the ‘ITR’) on 07.11.2017 declaring income of Rs.1,06,96,780/-. The case was picked up for scrutiny and the assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (In short, the ‘Act’) determining income at Rs.1,53,97,780. The cash deposits of Rs.47,01,000/- during the demonetization period was taxed by the Assessing Officer as unexplained credits under section 68 of the Act. 3. Aggrieved, the appellant/assessee raised the issue before the CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal in limine due to non-prosecution. The Ld. Counsel prayed for setting aside the case before the CIT(A) for afresh adjudication on merit. To which, the Ld. Sr. DR did not object. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the case record. We are of the considered view that it is a fit case for remitting back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merit. Accordingly, we order so. ITA No.3649/Del/2023 3 5. In view of the above, the appeal of the appellant/assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open Court on 31st May, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- (KUL BHARAT) (AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 31/05/2024 Binita, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. PCIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI