Matrix Cellular International Services Ltd., New Delhi V. Addl.CIT, Special Range- 6, New Delhi

ITA 7226/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4342 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 9 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-10-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 04-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAURAV PUNDIR
• Assessee Lawyers: A K KHANNA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI E BENCH: NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING ) BEFORE SHRI R.K.PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.7226/DEL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 M/S MATRIX CELLULAR INTERNATIONAL SERVICES LTD.,7-KHULLAR FARMS, MANDI ROAD, MEHRAULI, NEW DELHI-110030 VS THE ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-6, C.R. BUILDING, NEW DELHI-110002 PAN-AAECM5169M APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SH. A. K. KHANNA, CA RESPONDENT BY SH. GAURAV PUNDI R, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 28.09.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 01 . 10 .2021 ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESS EE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26.09.2017 OF THE LD. COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-37, NEW DELHI, (HEREINAFTER REF ERRED TO CIT(A)) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. THE A SSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- ITA NO. 7226/DEL/2017 2 | P A GE A) THE ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN LAW BY NOT CONSIDERING THE NATURE OF WRITE OFF OF SUNDRY ADVAN CE OF RS.10,26,158/-. B) THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN LAW BY N OT CONSIDERING FOLLOWING FACTS 1. WRITE OFF OF RS 3, 43,717/- OF TOURFONE CHINA DUE TO DIFFERENCE IN RECONCILIATION ON ACCOUNT PURCHASES OF SIM CARDS FROM THEM. 2. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN LAW BY DISALLOWING RS3,08,106/- ON ACCOUNT OF ERROR IN BILLING TO SUNDRY DEBTORS. C) THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN LAW BY DISALLOWING RS 3,26,804/- ON ACCOUNT OF EXCESS CHAR GES ON FINAL SETTLEMENT OF LOAN FROM RELIGIOUS FINVEST. D) THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN LAW BY DISALLOWING WRITE OFF RS 17,531/- ON ACCOUNT OF RECONCILIATION OF ACCOUNT WITH BENNET COLEMAN & CO, E) THE LEARNED CIT (A)-37 ERRED IN LAW BY NOT CONSIDERING THE DETAILS OF SUNDRY ADVANCES WRITE-OF F ALONG WITH DETAILS OF WRITE OFF & CASE LAWS QUOTED INSIDE LETTER DATED 26/09/2017 F) THE LEARNED CIT (A)-37 ERRED IN LAW BY NOT GIVI NG OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE FOR PRODUCING AUDITED ANNUAL ACCOUNTS. 2. A PERUSAL OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL REVEALS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT( A) IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE MADE IN RESPECT OF SUNDRY AD VANCES WRITTEN OFF OF RS.10,26,158/-. ITA NO. 7226/DEL/2017 3 | P A GE 3. THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED BEFORE THE LEARNED C IT(A) THAT THE AFORESAID AMOUNT WAS WRITTEN OFF DUE TO DIF FERENCE IN RECONCILIATION IN ACCOUNT, ERROR IN BILLING AND DIF FERENCE ARRIVED ON FINAL SETTLEMENT OF LOAN, ETC WITH DIFFERENT PART IES AS EXPLAINED IN THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 4. HOWEVER, THE LD.CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION M ADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSE E HAD FAILED TO ESTABLISH PRIMARILY THAT SUCH ADVANCES WERE TAKE N INTO ACCOUNT IN COMPUTING THE INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX F OR THE PREVIOUS YEAR IN WHICH SUCH AMOUNT BECAME IRRECOVERA BLE OR IN ANY EARLIER PREVIOUS YEARS AS REQUIRED AS PER THE P ROVISIONS OF SECTION 36(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAF TER REFERRED TO THE ACT). 5. BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DULY TAKEN INTO ACC OUNT THE AFORESAID ADVANCES WERE FOR COMPUTING THE INCOME FO R EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE FAILED TO APPRECIATE PROPERLY THE EVIDENCES FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS RESPECT. HE HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REM ANDED TO ITA NO. 7226/DEL/2017 4 | P A GE THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE LIMITED IS SUE TO VERIFY THAT THE AFORESAID ADVANCES/INCOME WAS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN COMPUTING THE INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION OR IN EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS. 6. THE LD. DR ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS RELIED UPON T HE FINDINGS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 7. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESS EE, THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO VERIFY THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE SUNDRY ADVANCES WRITTEN OFF WERE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN THE Y EAR UNDER CONSIDERATION OR IN EARLIER YEARS FOR COMPUTING THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AND IF THE ABOVE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSE E IS FOUND CORRECT, THEN NO DISALLOWANCE WILL MADE ON THIS ISSU E. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TR EATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 01/ 09/2021. SD/- SD/- (R.K.PANDA) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 7226/DEL/2017 5 | P A GE DELHI; DATED: 01 / 10 /2021 . F{X~{T F{X~{T F{X~{T F{X~{T COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI