JCIT, New Delhi V. M/s Oriflame India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4829/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4229 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-01-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 09-09-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ALKA GAUTAM
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH E NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 4829/DEL/2016 AY: 2009-10 JCIT, VS ORIFLAME INDIA PVT. LTD., SPECIAL RANGE-7, (ERSTWHILE M/S S ILVER OAK LABORATORIES NEW DELHI. PVT. LTD.), 1 ST FLOOR, L-29 TO 34, CONNAUGHT PLACE OUTER CIRCLE, NEW DELHI-110001 (PAN: AAACO0256B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : MS ALKA GAUTAM, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY: NONE DATE OF HEARING: 02.01.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 05.01.2018 ORDER PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAI NST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A)-7, N EW DELHI DATED 20.06.2016 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 09-10. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE CO MPANY HAD FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING INCOME OF RS. 13,51,11,558/-. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS REVISED DECL ARING INCOME OF RS. 13,32,66,378/-. THE RETURN WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY UNDER CASS AND THE TOTAL INCOME WAS COMPUTED AT RS. 15,70,94,101/- AFTER MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 2,38 ,27,723/- IN RESPECT OF UNCONFIRMED SUNDRY CREDITORS. AGGRIEVED , THE ASSESSEE ITA 4829/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 2 APPROACHED THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) WH O SUSTAINED A DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 1,31,03,247/- BUT GAVE RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE ON THE REMAINING AMOUNT. THIS RELIEF WAS GIVEN AF TER ADMITTING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. OUT OF THE TOTAL RELIEF OF RS. 1,07,24,476/- GIVEN BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A), THE DEPARTMENT IS IN APPEAL CHALLENGING THE DELETION OF SUNDRY CREDITORS AMOUNTING TO RS. 44,28,619/- ON TH E GROUND THAT THESE ADDITIONS WERE DELETED BY THE LD. COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) WITHOUT GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE AO TO EXAMINE THE SAME. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE DEPARTMENT ARE AS UNDER:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, TH E ID. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDEN CE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY SINCE NONE OF THE CONDITION AS LAID DOWN UNDER RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 ARE SATISFIED. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ID. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 44,28,619/- IN RESPECT OF THE CREDITORS WHOSE CONFIRMATION HAVE NOT BEEN SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSE E- COMPANY DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS WELL A S DURING REMAND PROCEEDINGS AND ALSO BEFORE THE ID. CIT(A). 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO BE ALLOWED TO ADD ANY F RESH GROUND (S) OF APPEAL AND/OR DELETE OR AMEND ANY OF THE GROUND(S) OF APPEAL.' ITA 4829/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 3 2.1 NONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. HO WEVER, LOOKING INTO THE FACTS OF THE CASE, WE DEEM IT FIT TO PROCEED WITH HEARING OF THE APPEAL EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE. 3. LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAD DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 62,95,857/- AFTER CALLING FOR A REM AND REPORT IN RESPECT OF THE CREDITORS AS MENTIONED IN PARA 4.8 O F THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND THE SAME WAS ALSO BASED ON THE REPORT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT CONFIRMATIONS HAD BEEN RECEIVED FROM T HE CREDITORS IN RESPECT OF THIS AMOUNT. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED T HAT CREDITORS AMOUNTING TO RS. 44,28,619/- WERE DELETED WITHOUT C ALLING FOR ANY REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE SE AMOUNTS AND THE DELETION WAS BASED ON THE BALANCES AS CONFI RMED BY THE CREDITORS. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HA D ERRED IN DELETING THESE ADDITIONS AS THE CONFIRMATIONS WERE NOT FORWARDED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR HIS COMMENTS/OBSERVATI ONS. IT WAS PRAYED THAT THIS DELETION BY THE LD. CIT(A) BE REVE RSED. 3.1 WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE FACTS IN THIS CASE ARE NOT UNDER DISPUTE. LD. CIT(A) WHILE DELETING THE ADDITIONS PERTAINING TO CREDITORS AMOUNTING TO RS. 62,95,857/- HAS SPECIFICALLY MENTI ONED IN PARA ITA 4829/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 4 4.8 THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE REMAND REPORT HAS STATED THAT THE REPLIES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FROM THESE CRED ITORS CONFIRMING THE BALANCES. HOWEVER, IN RESPECT OF TH E DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 44,28,619/- WHICH IS UNDER CHALLENG E BY THE DEPARTMENT IN THIS APPEAL, LD. CIT(A) HAS, IN PARA 4.9, ONLY MENTIONED THAT THE BALANCES HAVE BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE CREDITORS. HOWEVER, THERE IS NO INDICATION IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT REMAND REPORT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS CAL LED FOR IN RESPECT OF THESE SUNDRY CREDITORS ALSO. THEREFORE, THE GRIEVANCE OF THE DEPARTMENT IN THIS REGARD SEEMS CORRECT AND WE DEEM IT FIT TO RESTORE THE ISSUE OF DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 44 ,28,619/- TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) WITH THE DIRECTION TO DULY C ALL FOR A REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN RESPECT OF SUN DRY CREDITORS AS APPEARING AT SL. NOS. 7, 18, 24, 30, 33 AND 25 TOTA LLING TO RS. 44,28,619/- AND AS APPEARING IN THE TABLE IN PARA 4 .7 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND, THEREAFTER ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT STAN DS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA 4829/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 5 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 5.1.2018. SD/- SD/- (R.S. SYAL) (SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA) VICE PRESIDENT JUDIC IAL MEMBER DT. 5 TH JANUARY 2018 GS COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR