Trinetra Impex Pvt Ltd, New Delhi V. ACIT Circle-25(2), New Delhi

ITA 8353/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7218 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 22-10-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANJULA JAIN
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Application of stay; Additional evidence; Bad and doubtful debts; TDS; Set aside; FORM 26AS
• Section: 143(3); 234B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G, NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, VICE PRESIDENT DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SA NO. 44/DEL/2020 (IN ITA NO. 8353/DEL/2019 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2015-16) & ITA NO. 8353/DEL/2019 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2015-16 M/S TRINETRA IMPEX PVT. LTD., 8/19, W.E.A. SMILE CHAMBER, 2 ND FLOOR, KAROL BAGH, NEW DELHI - 110005 VS ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-25(2), NEW DELHI-110002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AABCT3848F ASSESSEE BY : SH. SALIL KAPOOR, ADV. REVENUE BY : DR. ANJULA JAIN, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 27 . 0 1 .2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 28 .01.2020 ORDER PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: STAY APPLICATION: THE ASSESSEE WAS CARRYING ON BUSINESS OF A CUSTOM CLEARING AGENT AND ACTED AS C&F AGENT. THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR AY 2015-16 ON 05.10.2015 D ECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 40,27,460/-. THE CASE OF THE AS SESSEE WAS SELECTED UNDER LIMITED SCRUTINY ON ACCOUNT OF MISMA TCH IN SALES TURNOVER. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDIN GS, IT WAS NOTICED BY ASSESSING OFFICER THAT AS PER FORM 26AS THE TOTAL RECEIPTS BY THE ASSESSEE WERE RS.6,60,65,680/-. IT WAS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT IN P&L ACCOUNT, THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOW N A TOTAL SA NO. 44/DEL/2020 ITA NO. 8353/DEL/2019 TRINETRA I MPEX PVT. LTD. 2 RECEIPTS OF RS.1,81,72,612/-. HENCE, THE ASSESSEE W AS ASKED TO EXPLAIN DISCREPANCY BETWEEN 26AS DATA AND ITS P& L ACCOUNT. 2. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED RECONCILIATION BETWEEN RE CEIPTS IN FORM 26AS AND CORRESPONDING REVENUE RECORDED AS PER P&L ACCOUNT WITH RESPECT TO THREE SAMPLE PARTIES SINCE THE NUMBER OF TRANSACTIONS AND THEIR RELATED DOCUMENTS WERE VO LUMINOUS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISREGARDED THE SUBMISSIONS O F THE ASSESSEE, AND VIDE ORDER SHEET ENTRY DATED 11.12.20 17 SHOW CAUSED THE ASSESSEE AS TO WHY ADDITION SHOULD NOT B E MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE OF RECEIPTS APPEARING IN FORM 26AS AND REVENUE DISCLOSED IN P&L ACCOUNT FOR THE RELEVANT A SSESSMENT YEAR. DATE OF COMPLIANCE TO FILE ALL SUBMISSIONS AN D DOCUMENTS FOR THE ASSESSEE WAS THE VERY NEXT DAY I.E. - 12.12 .2017. SINCE THE SUBMISSIONS AND DOCUMENTS WERE VOLUMINOUS IN NATURE AND TIME GIVEN WAS TOO SHORT AND SINCE THE A SSESSEE COULD NOT COMPLY WITH SHOW CAUSE OF THE ASSESSING O FFICER, HE ADDED DIFFERENCE OF RECEIPT SHOWN IN 26AS AND P&L A CCOUNT AMOUNTING TO RS. 4,78,93,068/- TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO ISSUED A DEMAND NOTIC E U/S 156 OF THE ACT RAISING THE DEMAND OF RS.2,07,49,030 /-. 4. DURING THE ARGUMENTS OF THE STAY APPLICATION AGA INST THE RECOVERY, IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT ADDITIO NAL EVIDENCES WERE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) WHI CH HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED UNDER RULE 46A WERE FORWARDED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND OBTAINED THE REMAND REPORT. THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER SUBMITTED TO THE LD. CIT (A) THAT THE RECONCILIATIO N HAS BEEN SA NO. 44/DEL/2020 ITA NO. 8353/DEL/2019 TRINETRA I MPEX PVT. LTD. 3 ACCEPTED EXCEPT FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.3,37,067/-. DUR ING THE HEARING OF THE STAY APPLICATION, THESE FACTS HAVE B EEN EXAMINED AND SINCE THE ISSUE INVOLVED VERIFICATION OF THE EXPENSES CLAIMED AS REIMBURSEMENT BY THE ASSESSEE, THE MATTER OF THE QUANTUM APPEAL HAS BEEN TAKEN UP SIMULTANEOUSLY AND ADJUDICATED. SINCE, THE STAY APP LICATION AND THE REGULAR APPEAL HAVE BEEN HEARD AND ORDERS A RE BEING PASSES SIMULTANEOUSLY. THE MATTER IN THE QUANTUM AP PEAL STANDS REMANDED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING O FFICER. HENCE, THE STAY APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE BECOMES INFRUCTUOUS AND TREATED AS DISMISSED. ITA NO. 8353/DEL/2019 5. FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE ASSESS EE: 1. THAT, IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT) DATE D 13.12.2017 BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER (THE AO) AND ALSO ADDITION/DISALLOWANCE MADE THEREIN IS ILLEGAL, BAD IN LAW AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION. 2. THAT, IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) (CIT(APPEALS)) HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF AO IN ASSESSING THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS. 5,19,20,530/- AS AGAINST THE RETURNED INCOME OF RS. 40,27,460/-. 3. THAT, THE AO/CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT THIS IS A CASE OF LIMITED SCRUTIN Y AND HENCE THE ADDITION MADE OF RS. 4,78,93,068/- IS ILLEGAL AND BAD IN LAW AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION. 4. THAT, IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE AO/CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN MAKING/UPHOLDING THE ADDITION ON THE BASIS OF ALLEGED DIFFERENCE OF RECEIPT SHOWN IN FORM 26AS SA NO. 44/DEL/2020 ITA NO. 8353/DEL/2019 TRINETRA I MPEX PVT. LTD. 4 AND FINANCIALS/RETURN OF INCOME AMOUNTING TO RS. 4,78,93,068/-. THE AO/CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE RECONCILIATION ALONG WITH ALL EVIDENCES/DETAILS AND DOCUMENTS AS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH EXPLAINS THE DIFFERENCE OF RECEIPT APPEARING IN FORM 26AS AND FINANCIALS/RETURN OF INCOME. 5. THAT, IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE ON THE BASIS OF THE ALLEGED DIFFERENCE OF RECEIPT SHOWN IN FORM 26 AS AND FINANCIALS/RETURN OF INCOME, AND HENCE THE SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 6. THAT, IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE AO/CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE BUSINESS MODEL OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE ACCOUNTING METHOD ADOPTED BY IT. 7. THAT, ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE AO/CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FAVOURABLE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE PERTAINING TO AY 2014-15 AND AY 2016-17, WHICH IS BASED ON IDENTICAL FACTS AND WHEREIN THE BUSINESS MODEL AND ACCOUNTING METHOD OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ACCEPTED. 8. THAT, IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE CIT(A) HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE O F THE ASSESSEE UNDER RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 (THE RULES). 9. THAT, IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE AO HAS ERRED IN PASSING THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER WITHOUT GIVING THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND THE SAME IS IN CLEAR VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUST ICE. 10. THAT, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, THE ADDITION MADE IS UNJUST, ILLEGAL, BAD IN LAW AND IS LIABLE TO BE DEL ETED. 11. THAT THE EXPLANATIONS GIVEN, EVIDENCE PRODUCED AND MATERIAL PLACED AND MADE AVAILABLE ON RECORD HAVE NOT BEEN PROPERLY CONSIDERED AND JUDICIALLY SA NO. 44/DEL/2020 ITA NO. 8353/DEL/2019 TRINETRA I MPEX PVT. LTD. 5 INTERPRETED AND THE SAME DO NOT JUSTIFY THE ADDITIO N MADE. 12. THAT, ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE AO HAS ERRED IN CHARGING INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B OF THE ACT. THE SAME HAS BEEN WRONGLY LEVIED AND IS ALSO EXCESSIVE. 13. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE AO HAS ERRED IN RECORDING SATISFACTION AN D INITIATING PENALTY PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C). 6. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT O F DIFFERENCE OF THE RECEIPTS SHOWN IN 26AS AND RETURN OF INCOME OF RS.4,78,93,068/-. RECEIPTS OF RS.6,60,65,680/- ARE APPEARING IN 26AS WHEREAS REVENUES FROM OPERATION O F RS.1,62,09,805/- AND OTHER INCOME OF RS.19,62,807/- TOTALING TO RS.1,81,72,612/- ARE DISCLOSED IN PROFIT AND LOS S A/C. 7. DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, ASSESSEE AC TED AS C&F AGENT AND PROVIDED SERVICES TO VARIOUS CLIENTS. ACCORDINGLY, INVOICES WERE RAISED IN THIS BEHALF. T HE INVOICE ISSUED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPRISED OF FOLLOWING COMPO NENTS: A. CUSTOM DUTY, AIR FREIGHT, DOCK / PORT CHARGES B. CRANE / FORK LIFT, SURVEY / INSURANCE / LICENSE PREM C. D.O. CHARGES / DETENTION, CUSTOMS DOCUMENTATION D. LOCAL TRANSPORT, LOADING / UNLOADING, REPAIR / PACKING E. EXAMINATION EXPENSES, PRINT OUT CHARGES, F. OTHERS CHARGES, LICENSE CHARGES G. AGENCY COMMISSION 8. OUT OF ABOVE MENTION COMPONENTS ONLY AGENCY COMMISSION WAS THE REVENUE OF ASSESSEE COMPANY AND ALL THE REMAINING COMPONENTS WERE BASICALLY REIMBURSEMENT T O THE SA NO. 44/DEL/2020 ITA NO. 8353/DEL/2019 TRINETRA I MPEX PVT. LTD. 6 GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT/ OUTSIDE AGENCIES WHICH THE A SSESSEE COMPANY PAYS AFTER RECOVERING THE SAME FROM CLIENTS . SUCH REIMBURSEMENTS WERE NEITHER TREATED AS INCOME OR EX PENSE IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THESE WERE DIRECTLY PAID TO A PARTICULAR VENDOR WHO BILLS THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FOR THE SPECI FIC AMOUNT SPENT BY ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENT EXPENSES AS MENTIONED ABOVE. THE VENDOR COMPANY ALSO INVOICES T O THE ASSESSEE COMPANY MENTIONING THE CLIENTS NAME WHICH CLEARLY SUPPORTS THE FACT THAT THE EXPENSE HAS BEEN DONE ON BEHALF OF THE CLIENTS. 9. BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A), THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN LARGE VOLUMES WITH RESPECT TO THE EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE ON BEHALF OF ITS CLIENT AND REIMBURSEMENT RECEIVED FROM THEM. S NO. PARTICULARS VOLUME NO. PAGE NO. 1. INVOICES RAISED BY ASSESSEE COMPANY TO ITS CLIENTS 1-9 1-4505 2. BILLS/LEDGERS BEING SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF REIMBURSABLE COMPONENTS ENCL.: 10-14 15-16 17-18 19-20 21 4506-7278 7279-8085 8086-8832 8833-9411 9412-9504 1. BILLS OF DOCK/AAL CHARGES INCURRED BY ASSESSEE 2. BILLS OF DELIVERY ORDER (DO) CHARGES INCURRED BY ASSESSED 3. CHALLAN OF CUSTOM DUTY 4. BILLS OF TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES INCURRED BY ASSESSEE 5. BILLS OF FREIGHT EXPENSES INCURRED BY ASSESSEE 10. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THE RECONCILIATION O F INCOME IN THE P&L ACCOUNT VIS--VIS THE INVOICES RAISED. SA NO. 44/DEL/2020 ITA NO. 8353/DEL/2019 TRINETRA I MPEX PVT. LTD. 7 PARTICULARS AMOUNT AMOUNT FORMULA TOTAL INVOICE VALUE 488,145,306 A INVOICE OF PREVIOUS YEAR 167,910 B TOTAL INVOICE OF CURRENT YEAR 437,977,396 C= A-B LESS: CUSTOM DUTY 405,906,684 D DOCK CHARGES 12,732,470 E FREIGHT/TRANSPORTATION: 27,114,964 F D.O. CHARGES: 12,982,145.25 G EXAMINATION EXPENSES:- I) LICENSE EXPENSES 646,610 II) BOND DEBITING 360,333 III) CRAIN/ FORKLIFT 823,556 IV) URGENT RAILMENT EXPENSES 960,000 V) MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES 831,077 3,621,576 H LOADING & UNLOADING EXPNESES:- I) WAGES 1,438,260 V) BOND DEBITING 360,333 VI) CRAIN/ FORKLIFT 823,556 VII) URGENT BAILMENT EXPENSES 960,000 V) MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES 831,077 3,621.576 LOADING & UNLOADING EXPNESES:- I)WAGES 1,438,260 II) PACKAGING/ SEALING 860,796 III) REPAIR AND OTHER EXPENSES 709,003 3,008,059 BE CHARGES/DOCUMENTATION CHARGES 436,045 SERVICE TAX (INCLUDING CESS) 3,918,684 K BAD DEBTS L CREDIT NOTE OF M/S TIRUPATI GLOBAL 211,500 COMMISSION PAID TO M/S. GVP FORWARDER 16,854 COMMISSION PAID TO M/S. CHOPRA ASSOCIATES 50,000 W/ OFF/DEDUCTION BY CLIENTS (ESTER INDUSTRIES LTD) 56,113 W/ OFF/DEDUCTION BY CLIENTS (MAJESTIC AUTO LTD.) 8,986.20 W/ OFF /DEDUCTION BY CLIENTS (GVB FORWARDER) 2,342 W/ OFF/DEDUCTION BY CLIENTS (INDIA MAT PRO) 2,527 W/ OFF /DEDUCTION BY CLIENTS (RTC INTERNATIONAL) 1,854 W/ OFF/DEDUCTION BY CLIENTS (POOJA FORGE) 1,685 W/ OFF /DEDUCTION BY CLIENTS (SANDEEP INDUSTRIES) 29,533 SA NO. 44/DEL/2020 ITA NO. 8353/DEL/2019 TRINETRA I MPEX PVT. LTD. 8 W7 OFF /D EDUCTION BY CLIENTS (RASA AUTOCOM) 3,821 W/ OFF/DEDUCTION BY CLIENTS (VEEGEE INDUSTRIES) 1,831 W/ OFF/DEDUCTION BY CLIENTS (HERO MOTORS LTD) 126,183.97 BAD DEBTS (M/S. MUNJAL SHOWA LTD.) 1,533,732.82 2,046,963 TOTAL EXPENSES 471,767,590 M= D+E+F+G+H +I+J+K+L INCOME AS PER PROFIT & LOSS A/C 16,209,806 N=C-M 11. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT EVEN AS PE R THE SERVICE TAX RETURN WHICH CONSISTED OF TRANSPORTATIO N, LOADING EXPENSES AND AGENCY COMMISSION, THE SERVICE TAX HAS BEEN LEVIED ONLY ON THE COMPONENTS WHICH ARE NOT REIMBUR SEMENTS. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO RECONCILED THE DIFFERENCES BE TWEEN RECEIPTS SHOWN IN THE SERVICE TAX RETURN AND REVENU ES FROM OPERATIONS. 12. FURTHER, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN CONSISTENTLY FOLLOWING SUCH METHOD OF ACCOUNTING AN D THE SAME HAS BEEN DULY ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT AS WELL. T HE DETAILS FOR THE EARLIER AND SUBSEQUENT YEARS ARE AS UNDER: ASSESSMENT YEAR RECEIPTS AS PER F ORM 26AS REVENUE AS PER BOOKS AY 2014 - 15 6,37,09,595/ - 1,58,93,920/ - AY 2016 - 17 6,66,32,3317 - 2,59,41,417/ - 13. THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BEFORE THE LD. C IT (A) WERE REMANDED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER TECHNICALLY REFUSED TO ACCEPT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDEN CES (PARA 3.4 OF THE CIT(A)), HE HAS EXAMINED THE MATTER ON MERIT S AND SUBMITTED THAT SA NO. 44/DEL/2020 ITA NO. 8353/DEL/2019 TRINETRA I MPEX PVT. LTD. 9 IT IS OBSERVED FROM THE RECONCILIATION FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY, IT IS OBSERVED THAT AMOUNT OF RS.6,52,05,1 81/- (SHOWN AS PAYMENT/ AMOUNT CREDITED IN THE FORM 26AS) ON WHICH TDS WAS DEDUCTED BY THE CLIENT OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ON I TS SERVICES, IN THIS REGARD, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS.6, 52,05,181/- WAS PART OF THE INVOICES HAVING THE VALUE OF RS.48,81,4 5,306/-. IN THE RECONCILIATION OF INVOICE VALUE WITH THE RECEIPTS R ECORDED IN THE FROM 26AS, IT IS OBSERVED THAT AGGREGATE VALUE OF I NVOICES ISSUED DURING THE YEAR AS PER THE SAID RECONCILIATION STAT EMENT IS RS.48,81,45,306/-. IN COMPARISON THERETO, TOTAL VAL UE OF INCOME REPORTED AS PER FORM 26AS IS RS.6,52,05,181/-. IN T HIS REGARD, ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE YOUR GOODSELF AN INVOICE WISE RECONCILIATION CITING REASON FOR DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE REVENUE AS PER EACH INVOICE VIS-A-VIS THE CORRESPONDING ENTRY IN FORM 26AS WHICH IS PLACED ON PAPER BOOK PAGE NO. 9722- 9866. IT IS OBSERVED THAT EACH PARTY HAS FOLLOWED DIFFERE NT MECHANISM OF DEDUCTING TAX AT SOURCE AND CONSIDERED DIFFERENT CO MPONENTS OF INVOICE FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEDUCTING TDS. SOME PART IES HAVE DEDUCTED TAX AT SOURCE ONLY IN RESPECT OF THE AGENC Y COMMISSION; SOME PARTIES HAVE DEDUCTED TAX AT SOURCE IN RESPECT OF TOTAL INVOICE VALUE LESS CUSTOM DUTY CHARGES, SOME PARTIES HAVE D EDUCTED TAX AT SOURCE IN RESPECT OF AIL COMPONENTS BUT DOCK CHARGE S AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, THE RECONCILIATION SUBMITTE D BY THE ASSESSEE WITH RESPECT TO VERIFIED ON TEST CHECK BASIS AND IT IS FOUND THAT AMOUNT SHOWN IN THE FORM 26AS COMPRISES IN THE DETA ILS OF INVOICES SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY . 14. FURTHER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO RECONCI LED THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TURNOVER AS PER SERVICE TAX RETURN AND SA NO. 44/DEL/2020 ITA NO. 8353/DEL/2019 TRINETRA I MPEX PVT. LTD. 10 AS RECORDED IN THE P&L A/C. THE REPORT OF THE ASSES SING OFFICER ON THIS ASPECT IS AS UNDER:(PAGE 30 OF THE CIT(A) A PPEAL) FROM THE ABOVE RECONCILIATION IT IS OBSERVED THAT T HE DIFFERENCE IN TURNOVER AS PER SERVICE TAX RETURN AN D THAT RECORDED IN PROFIT AND LOSS A/C HAS BEEN ARISEN BEC AUSE OF THE REASON THAT SENDEE TAX HAS BEEN LEVIED ONLY IN RESPECT OF AGENCY COMMISSION, TRANSPORTATION AND LOADING/UNLOADING CHARGES. THE DETAILS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD HAS BEEN EXAMINED AND IT IS FOUND THAT VARIOUS OTHER COMPONENTS SUCH AS CUSTOMS DUTY, DOCK CHARGES, EXAMINATION FEE, ETC. WHEN ADDE D TO SUCH VALUE RESULTS IN THE TOTAL INVOICE VALUE OF RS . 48,81,45,306/- WHICH HAS ALREADY BEEN RECONCILED WI TH THE FORM 26AS AND WITH P&L A/C. THE CONTENTS OF ABO VE RECONCILIATIONS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE HAVE BEEN TEST CHECKED, IN THIS REGARD, IT IS CLAIMED, BY THE ASSE SSEE THAT IT HAS FOLLOWED THE ACCOUNTING TREATMENT CONSI STENTLY IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS AS WELL BUT NO EVIDENCE, IN THI S REGARD, HAS BEEN FURNISHED BY JT IN THIS REGARD, TH E ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE ADDUCED BY THE ASSESSEE MAY BE CONSIDERED FOR THE DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFE RENCE OF RECEIPT SHOWN IN 26AS & RETURN OF INCOME. 15. THOUGH THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS EXAMINED THE RECONCILIATION PART ON MERITS EXCEPT A DIFFERENCE O F RS.3,37,067/-, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CHOOSEN NOT TO AC CEPT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND REJE CTED THE RECONCILIATION FILED BY ASSESSEE. DURING THE ARGUME NTS BEFORE US, THE LD. AR CONTENDED THAT THE VOLUMINOUS DATA G IVEN TO THE LD. CIT (A) COULD NOT HAVE COMPILED WITHIN A SHORT SPAN OF TWO DAYS I.E. THE DATE OF SHOW CAUSE 11.12.2017 AND THE DATE OF SA NO. 44/DEL/2020 ITA NO. 8353/DEL/2019 TRINETRA I MPEX PVT. LTD. 11 ORDER 13.12.2017. HE ARGUED THAT THE DETAILS FILED IF CONSIDERED WITH DUE DILIGENCE WILL RECONCILE THE CORRECT TAXAB LE INCOME. THE LD. DR ALSO FAIRLY ARGUED THAT THE MATTER NEEDS TO BE EXAMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY TAKING INTO CO NSIDERATION THE EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SUBSEQUENTLY. H ENCE, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION AND KEEPING IN VIEW, THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE PARTIES, THE TIME AVAILABLE TO THE ASSE SSEE DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE EXAMINATION UNDER T OOK BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES F IELD BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) AND THE REMAND REPO RT THEREOF, WE HEREBY SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE A SSESSING OFFICER TO RECONCILE THE MISMATCH OF TDS VIS--VIS THE RETURNED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 16. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28/01/2020. SD/- SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEM BER DATED: 28/01/2020 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR