Appeal Details
Counselvise Citation
[2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6720 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
1 year(s) 4 month(s) 24 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
25-06-2018
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
Not Allotted
Assessment Year
2012-2013
Appeal Filed On
31-01-2017
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M ANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 686 / MUM/2017 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 12 13 ) NOVA HAVC SYSTEMS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. UNIT NO.11 & 12, 339, UDYOG BHAVAN B.K. MARG, MAHIM (W), MUMBAI 400 015 PAN AACCN1228J . APPELLANT V/S INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5 ( 2 )( 1 ), MUMBAI . RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PRATIK PODDAR A/S SHRI PARAS SAVLA REVENUE BY : MS. N. HEMALATHA DATE OF HEARING 22 .0 5 .2018 DATE OF ORDER 25.05.2018 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M. AFORESAID APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST ORDER DATED 17 TH OCTOBER 2016 , PASSED BY THE L EARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) 21 , MUMBAI, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 012 13 . 2 . T HOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THREE EFFECTIVE GROUNDS, HOWEVER, THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE RELATES TO ADDITION OF AN AMOUNT OF ` 51,10,485. 2 NOVA HAVC SYSTEMS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. 3 . BRIEF FACTS ARE, THE ASSESSEE A COMPANY IS STATED TO BE ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF DEALING AND AFTER SALE SERVICE OF AIR CONDI TIONER S . FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER DISPUTE, ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 28 TH SEPTEMBER 2012, DECLARING LOSS OF ` 8,34,675. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, ON THE BASIS OF SYSTEM GENERATED INFORMATION, THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT CONT RACT RECEIPTS OF ` 51,10,485, FROM FIVE PARTIES RECEIVED DURIN G THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR HAVE NOT BEEN OFFERED TO INCOME , THOUGH , THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED TDS ON SUCH AMOUNT. ALLEGING THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO FURNISH ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FOR RECONCILING THE DIFFERENCE THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADDED BACK THE AMOUNT OF ` 51,10,485 BEING THE DIFFERENCE IN CONTRACT RECEIPT S TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. BEING AGGRIEVED , OF SUCH ADDITION, AS SESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. 4 . THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) AGREEING WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER UPHELD THE ADDITION. 5 . THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT DUE TO CIRCUMSTANCES BEYOND THE CONT ROL OF THE ASSESSEE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES COULD NOT BE PRODUCED BEFORE THE DEPARTMENTAL AUTHORITIES TO RECONCILE THE DIFFERENCE. HE SUBMITTED, NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN 3 NOVA HAVC SYSTEMS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. POSSESSION OF RELEVANT DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES TO RECONCILE THE DIFFERENCE IN CONTRACT RECEI PT S . HE SUBMITTED, GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY ASSESSEE WILL PRODUCED THE NECESSARY EVIDENCES BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ESTABLISH ITS CLAIM. 6 . THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS NO OBJECTION IF AN OPPORTUNITY IS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO RECONCILE T HE DIFFERENCE. 7 . HAVING CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES, IT IS SEEN FROM RECORD THAT THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN CONTRACT RECEIPT WAS BASICALLY MADE AS THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES TO RECONCILE THE DIFFERENCE. IT IS EVIDENT, BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), THE ASSESSEE HAS PLEADED THAT THE DIFFERENCE IN CONTRACT RECEIPT HAS EITHER BEEN SHOWN IN THE PREVIOUS YEARS OR IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ESTABLISH ITS CLAIM THROUGH PROPER EVIDENCE. CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOW IN A POSITION TO RECONCILE THE DIFFERENCE THROUGH SUPPORTING EVIDENCE, WE ARE INCLINED TO RESTORE THE ISSUE TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DE NOVO ADJUDIC ATION AFTER DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. GROUNDS RAISED ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4 NOVA HAVC SYSTEMS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. 8 . IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25.05.2018 SD/ - MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/ - SAKTIJIT DEY JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 25.05.2018 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : ( 1 ) THE ASSESSEE; ( 2 ) THE REVENUE; ( 3 ) THE CIT(A); ( 4 ) THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED; ( 5 ) THE DR, ITAT, MUMBAI; ( 6 ) GUARD FILE . TRUE COPY BY ORDER PRADEEP J. CHOWDHURY SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ( SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ) ITAT, MUMBAI
Mehul