M/s. MIQ Foods Pvt. Ltd., Meerut V. ITO, Meerut

ITA 4179/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6464 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 29-07-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MUNSHI RAM BIHAGRA SENIOR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCHES (CAMP AT MEERUT) BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.4179 /DEL./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13) M/S. MIQ FOODS PVT. LTD., VS. ITO, WARD 1(4), C/O VINOD KUMAR GOEL, MEERUT. 282, BOUNDARY ROAD, CIVIL LINES, MEERUT. (PAN : AAGCM8483J) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI VINOD KUMAR GOEL, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : SHRI MUNSHI RAM BIHAGRA, SENIOR DR DATE OF HEARING : 07.01.2019 DATE OF ORDER : 16.01.2019 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE APPELLANT, M/S. MIQ FOODS PVT. LTD. (HEREINAFTE R REFERRED TO AS THE ASSESSEE) BY FILING THE PRESEN T APPEAL, SOUGHT TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 19.07.2016 PASSE D BY LD. CIT (APPEALS), MEERUT QUA THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 O N THE GROUNDS INTER ALIA THAT :- 1. THAT LD. AO ERRED IN FACTS AND IN COMPLETING TH E ASSESSMENT U/S 144 OF I.T. ACT AND LD. CIT(A) HAS D ISMISSED THE APPEAL WITH CONSIDERING THE MERITS OF THE CASE, HEN CE THE ORDER PASSED BY CIT(A) IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURA L JUSTICE. ITA NO.4179/DEL./2016 2 2. THAT LD. AO ERRED IN FACTS AND LAW BY MAKING ADD ITION OF RS.35,00,000/- TOWARD UNSECURED LOAN FROM SH. M/S. AI-FAHEEM METAX PVT. LTD. IGNORING THE FACTS THAT THE CONFIRM ATION WITH ADDRESS AND PAN OF THE CREDITOR WAS FURNISHED AND T HE FACTS THAT THE SAID SUMS WERE RECEIVED THROUGH CHEQUE/RTGS. AN D CIT(A) ALSO ERRED BY CONFIRMING THE SAME. 3. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES THE CASE THE LD. AO HAS ERRED IN LAW IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 7 LACS TOWAR DS UNSECURED LOANS IN THE NAME OF MIS. FARMAN IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE LOAN WAS RECEIVED THROUGH CHEQUE/RTGS. AND CIT(A) ALSO E RRED BY CONFIRMING THE SAME. 4. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE L D. AO HAS ERRED IN LAW IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 2 CRORES TOW ARDS UNSECURED LOAN FROM MIS. HIND AGRO PVT. LTD. IGNORI NG THE FACT THAT THE SUMS WERE RECEIVED THROUGH CHEQUE/RTGS. AN D CIT(A) ALSO ERRED BY CONFIRMING THE SAME. 5. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE L D. AO HAS ERRED IN LAW IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.4400577/- TOW ARDS TRADE PAYABLE IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY PURCHASED THE MACHINERY FROM FRICK INDIA LIMITED FOR RS.11900 577/- AND THE BALANCE OF RS. 4400577/- WAS PAYABLE TO THE MAC HINERY SUPPLIER AND CIT(A) ALSO ERRED BY CONFIRMING THE SA ME. 6. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE L D. AO HAS ERRED IN LAW IN MAKING ADDITION OF SHARE APPLICATIO N MONEY OF RS.49 LACS IN THE NAME OF M/S. LODHI ENTERPRISES IG NORING THE FACTS THAT THE SUMS WERE RECEIVED THROUGH BANKING C HANNEL AND CIT(A) ALSO ERRED BY CONFIRMING THE SAME. 7. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE L D. AO HAS ERRED IN LAW IN MAKING ADDITION OF SHARE APPLICATIO N MONEY OF RS.25 LACS IN THE NAME OF MADHAV FIN CORP. IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE SAID SUMS WERE RECEIVED THROUGH BANKING CH ANNEL AND CIT(A) ALSO ERRED BY CONFIRMING THE SAME. 8. THAT THE ASSESSEE CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD OR MODIFY THE GROUND OF APPEAL IF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WAR RANT BEFORE OR DURING THE APPEAL PROCEEDINGS AND CIT(A) ALSO ER RED BY CONFIRMING THE SAME. ITA NO.4179/DEL./2016 3 2. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS NECESSARY FOR ADJUDICAT ION OF THE CONTROVERSY AT HAND ARE : ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLET ED THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT) BY MAKING ADDITION UNDER DIFFERENT HEADS WHICH IS AS UNDER :- RS. A. TAXABLE INCOME AS PER RETURN NIL ADD : I. ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOANS 24200000 II. ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF SUNDRY CREDITORS 4400577 III. ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY 7400000 IV. ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE PREMIUM 9880000 TAXABLE INCOME 45880577 TAXABLE INCOME ROUNDED 45880580 3. ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BY WAY OF AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) WHO HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL. FEELING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE HAS COME UP BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY WAY OF FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES TO THE APPEAL, GONE THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS R ELIED UPON AND ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN T HE LIGHT OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 5. BARE PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AT PAGE 3 G OES TO PROVE THAT THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE ATTENDED ASSESSMEN T PROCEEDINGS ON ITA NO.4179/DEL./2016 4 18.03.2015 AND AT HIS REQUEST, THE CASE WAS ADJOURN ED TO 20.03.2015. BUT, ON 20.03.2015, NONE APPEARED AND AGAIN LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE APPEARED ON 23.03.2015 WHO HAS FIL ED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS SUPPORTED WITH LEDGER ACCOUNTS AND BANK STATEMENTS OF LENDERS OF UNSECURED LOANS, TRADE CREDITORS, SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AND SHARE PREMIUM. AO WITHOUT EXAMINING THE SUBMISSIONS SUPPORTED WITH DOCUMENTS MADE BY THE AS SESSEE PROCEEDED TO MAKE THE STATEMENT U/S 144 OF THE ACT ON 27.03.2015. 6. IT APPEARS THAT AO HAS NOT PROVIDED ADEQUATE OPP ORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE RATHER PROCEEDED TO HOL D THAT MERE COPIES OF LEDGER ACCOUNTS, BANK STATEMENTS OF THE L ENDERS OF THE UNSECURED LOAN, TRADE CREDITORS, SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AND SHARE PREMIUM DO NOT PROVE THE IDENTIFICATION, CREDITWORT HINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. AO HAS NEITHER HI MSELF PROCURED THE PRESENCE OF THE TRADE CREDITORS, LENDERS OF UNS ECURED LOANS AND SHARE APPLICANTS NOR DIRECTED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODU CE THEM RATHER PROCEEDED TO MAKE THE ASSESSMENT U/S 144 OF THE ACT IN HASTE. 7. MOREOVER, ADDITION OF RS.9,88,00,000/- DOES NOT PERTAIN TO YEAR UNDER ASSESSMENT. EVEN, LD. CIT (A) HAS NOT P ROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE WHO HAS SOUGHT TO LEAD ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE UNDER RULE 46 OF THE INCOME-TAX RULES, 1962 BUT PROCEEDED TO DISMISS APPLICATION FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. SO, ITA NO.4179/DEL./2016 5 IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VI EW THAT THE MATTER IS REQUIRED TO BE RESTORED BACK TO THE AO TO DECIDE AFRESH AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 6. RESULTANTLY, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 16 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019. SD/- SD/- (N.S. SAINI) (KULDIP SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED THE 16 TH DAY OF JANUARY , 2019 TS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A), MEERUT. 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.