ITO, New Delhi V. Smt. Kajal Aggarwal, New Delhi

ITA 6341/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 97119 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 31-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 29-11-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAMEER SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: VIRENDER CHAUHAN
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 133(6); 68

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO. 6341/D EL/13 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: D NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI I.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-6341/DEL/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2007-08) ITO, WARD 35(2), NEW DELHI. VS SMT. KAJAL AGGARWAL, PROP. M/S LAKSHAY UDYOG, X/3626, MAIN ROAD, SHANTI MOHALLA, GANDHI NAGAR, NEW DELHI. AAEPA8891P APPELLANT BY SHRI. SAMEER SHARMA, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY SH. VIRENDER CHAUHAN, CA ORDER PER I.C.SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE PRESENT APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 09.09.2013, FOR A.Y. 2007-08, PASSED BY THE L D. CIT(A) ON FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IS BAD IN LAW AND NOT IN CONSON ANCE WITH THE FACTS OF THE CASE. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. DATE OF HEARING 31.07.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 26.08.2015 2 ITA NO. 6341/D EL/13 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN REMANDING THE CASE BACK TO THE AO FOR VERIFICATION OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILE D DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DECIDING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE SOLE BASIS OF REMAND REPORT OF THE AO WITHOUT FIRST CONSIDERING AND ADJUDICATING THE MERI TS OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 2. FACTUAL MATRIX THAT NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED IN TH E PRESENT APPEAL IS AS UNDER: THE APPELLANT IS A TRADER IN CLOTH AND THE RETURN O F INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 WAS FILED ON 24.09.2007 AT A TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 2,02,950/-. THE ASSESSMENT UNDER 143 (3) WAS COMPLETED ON 29.12.2009 AT TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 75,6 0,670/-. IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE AO HAD ADDED BACK SUND RY CREDITS; LOAN CREDITS; ADVANCE RECEIVED AGAINST PRO PERTY AND ALSO DISALLOWED CERTAIN EXPENSES, ON THE GROUND THA T PROPER EVIDENCES WERE NOT SUBMITTED DURING ASSESSMENT PROC EEDINGS. 3. THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO ON THE BASIS OF THE EVIDENCES PRODUCED BEFORE HIM AND, THE REMAND REPORT CALLED FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. IN SUPPORT OF THE GROUNDS, LD. DR PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 5. THE LD. AR ON THE CONTRARY CONTENDED THAT THE A SSESSEE COMPANY HAD FILED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE BEFORE THE LD . CIT(A) AND THE SAME WAS FORWARDED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR HIS CONSIDERATION. ASSESSING OFFICER IN HIS REPORT DAT ED 3 ITA NO. 6341/D EL/13 09.09.2010 HAD REQUESTED FOR CIT(A)S PERMISSION TO CONDUCT FURTHER ENQUIRIES AND THE SAME WAS GRANTED BY LD. C IT(A) VIDE LETTER DATED 25/05/2012. ACCORDINGLY ASSESSING OFF ICER FILED A DETAILED REPORT DATED 24/12/2012 AFTER CONDUCTING N ECESSARY ENQUIRIES. 5.1 THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) DECIDE D THE ISSUES ON THE BASIS OF THE REMAND REPORT DATED 24/12/2012 FUR NISHED BY AO. HE POINTED OUT THAT THE AO HAD ISSUED 133(6) NOTICE S TO THE SUNDRY CREDITORS, UNSECURED LOAN CREDITORS, PARTIES WHO HA D PAID ADVANCES FOR LAND AND HAD OBTAINED CONFIRMATIONS FROM THEM. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED FURTHER THAT SOME OF THE SUNDRY CREDITS W ERE RELATING TO THE PREVIOUS ASSESSMENT YEAR AND WERE REFLECTED IN THE OPENING BALANCE AND, THEREFORE, NO ADDITION COULD BE MADE I N RESPECT OF SUCH CREDITORS. 5.2 THE LD. AR SUBMITTED FURTHER THAT THE AO IN THE REMAND REPORT HAS NOT DISPUTED THE TRANSACTIONS AND MERELY BASED ON HIS SURMISES AND CONJUNCTURES HAS DISALLOWED THE CLAIM. HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS VERIFIED THE DETAILS FILED IN THE LI GHT OF THE REMAND REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND ALLOW ED THE CLAIM. 6. HAVING GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIE S BELOW, WE DO NOT FIND INFIRMITY IN THE FIRST APPELLATE ORDER ON THE ISSUE. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE DISALLOWANCES MADE IN TH E ASSESSMENT ORDER RELYING ON THE REMAND REPORT CALLED FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER, ON THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BEFORE HI M. IN ITS REMAND REPORT THE ASSESSING OFFICER AFTER VERIFICATION AND INQUIRY CONDUCTED BY HIM, HAS NOT DISPUTED THE VERACITY OF THE EVIDENCES 4 ITA NO. 6341/D EL/13 FILED IN SUPPORT OF THE GENUINENESS OF THE CLAIM. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, DURING THE COURSE OF REMAND PROCEEDINGS, H AD NOT ONLY ISSUED NOTICES U/S 133(6) TO THE SUNDRY CREDITORS, UNSECURED LOAN CREDITORS AND THE PARTIES WHO HAD PAID ADVANCES FOR LAND AND HAD OBTAINED THEIR CONFIRMATION BUT HAD ALSO OBSERVED T HAT SOME OF THE SUNDRY CREDITS WERE RELATED TO EARLIER YEAR. CONSI DERING THE ABOVE FINDING OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE REMAND REPO RT, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION IN QUESTION MADE U/S 68 OF THE ACT. THE FIRST APPELLA TE ORDER IN THIS REGARD IS THUS UPHELD. THE GROUNDS ARE REJECTED. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26.08. 2015 SD/- SD/- (S.V. MEHROTRA) (I.C. SUDHIR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 26/08/2015 *KAVITA, P.S. COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI 5 ITA NO. 6341/D EL/13 DATE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 04.08.2015 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 06.08.2015 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 06.08.2015 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. 26.08.2015 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 26.08.2015 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON 26.08.2015 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 27.08.2015 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.