M/S SKS BUILDERS, FEROZPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, FEROZPUR

ITA 621/ASR/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2912 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-05-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 09-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: TDS; FORM 26AS
• Section: 139

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 621/Asr/2018 Assessment Year: 2015-16 SKS Builders C/o LMG Timbers, Moga Road, Near Chhabila Mandir, Ferozepur Cantt (PB) 152001 [PAN: ACNFS 6537K] Vs. I .T O. Ferozepur (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None (Written submission) Respondent by: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 28.04.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 06.05.2022 ORDER Per Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appeal was filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Bathinda [in brevity the CIT(A)], bearing Appeal No. 209-IT/17-18 dated 12.09.2018 u/s 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in brevity the Act], in respect of Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The brief fact of the case is that the assessee is a works contractor and filed return that declaring the turnover amount of Rs.1,09,71,691/-. The ld. Assessing Officer (in brevity the AO) selected for scrutiny through CASS system due to ITA No. 621/Asr/2018 SKS Builders v. ITO 2 difference of turnover in Form 26AS and the turnover declared by the assessee in return u/s 139 of the Act for the assessment year 2015-16. The assessee declared the turnover of Rs.1,09,71,691/- in its return. The turnover was posted in Form- 26AS amount to Rs. 1,15,55,118/-. So the difference amount of Rs.583427/- is ascertained by revenue. As per the ld. AO, the reason of difference in turnover is that the assessee executed civil work amount to Rs.8,74,129/- in Executive Engineer, Punjab Health Work System, Bathinda (in brevity contractee) under which the TDS under the Act was claimed by assessee amount to Rs.17,483/-. The reply was received from contractee that contract as well as payments of Rs 8,74,129/- were made to the assessee-firm. So the undisclosed amount of Rs. 8,74,129/- was added back to the total income of assessee. 3. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee’s plea. 4. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before us. 5. The ld. counsel of the assessee filed a paper book and a detail documents was submitted related to difference of the turnover & undisclosed amount. As per the ld. counsel, the one of the partners, named Mr. Sham Singh Makkar was also running a proprietory firm in the same name of assessee, M/s SKS Builders. The said work order with contractee, PHSC, Bathinda was executed by the partner himself in his individual capacity. But the contractee wrongly connected this amount in the head of the partnership firm in its form no-26AS. In this respect, the assessee filed bank statement, ledger accounts and the certificate from auditor in favour of his claim. As per the documents, this particular amount is not related with the assessee. It is only related with the partner of the firm who executed the work under individual capacity. ITA No. 621/Asr/2018 SKS Builders v. ITO 3 6. The ld DR vehemently opposed & relied on the orders of revenues. 7. We have considered the documents available on record. This particular issue was not agitated before the ld. AO. The ld CIT(A) had considered the assessee’s plea. But no proper investigation was made related factual interpretation od assessee-firm. This is a factual different in between the assessee’s claim & amount posted in Form no-26AS. In this particular factual matrix, the issue should be verified by the ld. Assessing Officer only. So, we are setting aside the issue before the ld. Assessing Officer for adjudication denavo in this particular issue. The assessee, in turn, is directed to substantiate its case. Needless to add that adequate opportunity of hearing shall be granted to the assessee. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 06.05.2022 Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. M. L. Meena) (Anikesh Banerjee) Accountant Member Judicial Member Date: 06.05.2022 *GP/Sr. PS* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT(A), (4) The CIT concerned (5) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T (6) The Guard File True Copy By Order