DCIT, CC-1(4), Ahmedabad V. M/s. Shreeem Construction, Ahmedabad

ITSSA 58/AHD/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1367 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 3 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-06-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 25-06-2024
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 06-03-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: FORTHEREVENUE; COULDNOTDISPUTETHE
• Keywords: TDS

Judgement Text

INTHEINCOMETAXAPPELLATETRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD“D”BENCH Before:ShriT.R.SenthilKumar,JudicialMember And ShriMakarandVasantMahadeokar,AccountantMember TheDCIT, CentralCircle-1(4), Ahmedabad. (Appellant) Vs Ms.ShreemConstruction 3 rd Floor,Solitaire Building, Opp.BombayGarage, Sahibaug, Ahmedabad-380004. PAN:ABUFS3908C (Respondent) RevenueRepresented:Dr.DarsiSumanRatnam,CIT.DR AssesseeRepresented:None Dateofhearing:26-06-2024 Dateofpronouncement:28-06-2024 आदेश/ ORDER PERT.RSENTHILKUMAR,JUDICIALMEMBER:- ThesetwoappealsarefiledbytheRevenueasagainstthe separateappellateordersdated05.12.2018,passedbythe CommissionerofIncomeTax[Appeals]-11,arisingoutofthe assessmentorderspassedundersection143(3)r.w.s153ofthe IncomeTaxAct,1961(hereinafterreferredtoas‘theAct’)relating totheAssessmentYears2011-12&2012-13. IT(SS)ANos.57-58/Ahd/2019 AsstYears(2011-12&2012-13) I.T(SS).ANos.57&58/Ahd/2019A.Y.2011-12&2012-13PageNo DCITVs.M/s.ShreemConstruction 2 1.FirstwetakeIT(SS)ANo.57/Ahd/2019forAY2011-2012, anappealbytheRevenue.TheRevenuehasraisedthefollowing groundsofappeal: 1.Onthefactsandinthecircumstancesofthecaseandinlaw,the Ld.CIT(A)haserredinadmittingtheadditionalevidencesubmitted bytheassesseeeventhoughnumerousandsufficientopportunity wasprovidedtotheassesseeduringtheassessmentproceedings andtheconditionsofRule46Aarenotsatisfied. 2.Onthefactsandinthecircumstancesofthecaseandinlaw,the Ld.CIT(A)haserredinlawandonfactsindeletingtheadditionof Rs.1,50,00,000/-u/s.68oftheActfromNewWaveCommercialPvt. Ltd.&Rs.50,00,000/-fromMeetEnterprises. 3.Onthefactsandinthecircumstancesofthecaseandinlaw,the Ld.CIT(A)haserredinlawandonfactsindeletingtheadditionof interestu/s.40(a)(ia)ofRs.6,69,906/-. 4.Onthefactsandinthecircumstancesofthecaseandinlaw,the Ld.CIT(A)haserredinlawandonfactsindeletingthedisallowance ofinterestofRs.21,30,783/-. 5.Onthefactsandinthecircumstancesofthecaseandinlaw,the Ld.CIT(A)oughttohaveupheldtheorderoftheA.Ο. 6.Itis,therefore,prayedthattheorderoftheLd.CIT(A)besetaside andthatoftheA.O.berestoredtotheaboveextent. 2.Todayisthe42 nd dayofhearingoftheaboveappealsand noneappearedonbehalfoftheassesseeandnoauthorizationfiled bytheassessee. 3.ThebrieffactofthecaseisthattheAssessingOfficer(AO) hadmadetheadditionu/s.68oftheAct,ofunsecuredloan amountingtoRs.1,50,00,000/-takenfromNewWaveCommercial I.T(SS).ANos.57&58/Ahd/2019A.Y.2011-12&2012-13PageNo DCITVs.M/s.ShreemConstruction 3 Pvt.Ltd.andRs.50,00,000/-fromMeetEnterprises.Theassessee hasproducedthecopyofLedgeraccount,Form16A,TDSchallan andReturnofIncomerelatingtotheaboveparties.However,the AOwasnotsatisfiedwiththeabovesubmissionandmadethe additionu/s.68oftheAct. 4.OnfurtherappealbeforetheLd.CIT(A),theLd.CIT(A)deleted theadditionaftercallingforRemandReportfromtheAOandheld asfollows: “....Theassesseehasprovidedfinancialstatement.Copyofledgerof NewwaveCommercialPrivateLimited,confirmationonthe letterheadofNewwaveCommercialPrivateLimited,Bankstatement, PANoftheNewwaveCommercialPrivateLimited,FormNo.16Aand TDSchallan.acknowledgmentoffillingincometaxreturn, Confirmationoftheassessee'sletteranditsstatusfromtheMCA portal.Ihavecarefullyperusedtheremandreportandrejoinderfiled bytheappellant.Thelendercompanyviz.NewwaveCommercial PrivateLimitedhastotalsharecapitalandreservesofRs 43,01,00,200whichprovesthecreditworthinessofthelender. Moreover,theassesseehasfurnishedCopyofledgerofNewwave CommercialPrivateLimited,confirmationontheletterheadof NewwaveCommercialPrivateLimited,Bankstatement,FormNo. 16AandTDSchallanandConfirmationoftheassessee'sletterto provethegenuinenessofthetransaction.Moreover,theassessee hasrepaidtheloanduringthenextfinancialyearsbeforesearch. Andiftheassesseehasrepaidtheloanandthedepartmenthas acceptedthesamewithoutprobingintoit,theadditionofsuch unsecuredloanasunexplainedcashcreditu/s68needstobe deletedasheldbyHon'bleGujaratHighCourtincaseofCITVis. AyachiChandrashekharNarsangji[2014]42taxmann.com251/221 Taxman146(Gujarat).TheHighCourthasheldinParaNo.6as under: 6ItisrequiredtonotethatassuchanamountofRs.1,00,00,000 videchequeNo.102110andanamountofRs.60lakhsvidecheque No.102111wasgiventotheassesseeandoutofthetotalloanofRs. 1.60crores,Rs.15lakhsvidechequeno.196107wasrepaidand therefore,anamountofRs.1,45,00,000remainedoutstandingtobe I.T(SS).ANos.57&58/Ahd/2019A.Y.2011-12&2012-13PageNo DCITVs.M/s.ShreemConstruction 4 paidtoIA.Ithasalsocomeonrecordthatthesaidloanamounthas beenrepaidbytheassesseeto'A'intheimmediatelynextyearand theDepartmenthadacceptedtherepaymentofloanwithoutprobing intoit.Intheaforesaidfactsandcircumstancesofthecase,when theTribunalhasheldthatthematterisnotrequiredtoberemanded asnootherviewwouldbepossible,therewasnoreasontointerfere withtheimpugnedorderpassedbytheTribunal." Thelendercompanywasalsohavingan"Active"statusasperthe statusavailableonMCAPortal.Fromthecopyofthecompany masterdata,itcanbeseenthatthedetailoftheDirectors/Signatory wasupdatedon02.01.2018.Andtherefore,itcanbeinferredthat thecompanyisanactiveone.Onperusalofallthedocumentsfiled bytheassesseetheassesseehasprovedbeyondthedoubtabout thecreditworthinessandgenuinenessofthetransactionand thereforetheadditionofRs.1,50,00,000isdeleted.Asregardsthe unsecuredloanfromM/s.MeetEnterprise,theassesseefumished CopyofledgerofM/sMeetEnterprise,FormNo.16AandTDS challanPANofMis.MeetEnterpriseandBankStatement.These documentsalsoprovethegenuinenessandcreditworthinessofthe transaction.Moreover,suchloanisalsorepaidbytheassessee duringnextfinancialyearsbeforesearch,Andthereforeitisalso squarelycoveredbytheJurisdictionalHighCourtJudgementand thusliabletobedeleted.Thisgroundofappealisallowed...” 5.TheLd.DRappearingfortheRevenue,couldnotdisputethe repaymentofloanbytheassesseetotheabovepartiesandalsonot disputethefindingsarrivedbytheLd.CIT(A).Intheabsenceofthe same,thegroundraisedbytheRevenueisdevoidofmeritsand sameisliabletobedismissed. 6.Intheresult,theappealfiledbytheRevenueishereby dismissed. 7.Now,comingtotheIT(SS)ANo.58/Ahd/2019forAY2012- 2013,anappealbytheRevenue.TheRevenuehasraisedthe followinggroundsofappeal. I.T(SS).ANos.57&58/Ahd/2019A.Y.2011-12&2012-13PageNo DCITVs.M/s.ShreemConstruction 5 1.Onthefactsandinthecircumstancesofthecaseandinlaw,the LdCIT(A)haserredinadmittingtheadditionalevidencesubmitted bytheassesseeeventhoughnumerousandsufficientopportunity wasprovidedtotheassesseeduringtheassessmentproceedings andtheconditionsofRule46Aarenotsatisfied. 2.Onthefactsandinthecircumstancesofthecaseandinlaw,the Ld.CIT(A)haserredinlawandonfactsinrestrictingtheadditionto Rs.5,91,120/-asagainsttotaladditionofRs.34,55,600/-made u/s.69oftheAct. 3.Onthefactsandinthecircumstancesofthecaseandinlaw,the Ld.CIT(A)haserredinlawandonfactsindeletingtheadditionof interestofRs.19,68,118/-. 4.Onthefactsandinthecircumstancesofthecaseandinlaw,the Ld.CIT(A)haserredinlawandonfactsindeletingthedisallowance ofinterestofRs.59,98,899/- 5.Onthefactsandinthecircumstancesofthecaseandinlaw,the Ld.CIT(A)oughttohaveupheldtheorderoftheA.O. 6.Itis,therefore,prayedthattheorderoftheLd.CIT(A)besetaside andthatoftheA.O.berestoredtotheaboveextent. 8.Itissubmittedthattaximposedinthiscaseisof Rs.35,29,589/-andinterestchargedisRs.19,05,979/-since,the taxinvolvedinthisDepartmentappealislessthanRs.50,00,000/- andasperCBDTCircularNo.17/2019dated08.08.2019,the appealfiledbytheRevenueisnotmaintainableandliabletobe dismissed.Thus,theappealfiledbytheRevenueisdismissedon LowTaxEffect. 9.IntheresulttheappealfiledbytheaRevenueisdismissed duetoLowTaxEffect. I.T(SS).ANos.57&58/Ahd/2019A.Y.2011-12&2012-13PageNo DCITVs.M/s.ShreemConstruction 6 10.Inthecombinedresult,theappealsfiledbytheRevenue inIT(SS)ANo.57/Ahd/2019forAY2011-12isdismissedand IT(SS)ANo.58/Ahd/2019forAY2012-13isalsodismisseddue toLowTaxEffect. Orderpronouncedintheopencourton28-06-2024 Sd/-Sd/- (MAKARANDVASANTMAHADEOKAR)(T.R.SENTHILKUMAR) ACCOUNTANTMEMBERJUDICIALMEMBER (TrueCopy) Ahmedabad:Dated28/06/2024 Manish