KASTWEL FOUNDRIES,AHMEDABAD V. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(2), AHMEDABAD

MA 47/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Kastwell Foundries appealing against the disallowance of commission expenses by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, which was upheld by the CIT(A). The Tribunal's initial decision on 15.04.2025 disallowed the commission expenses based on the non-response of S.V. Associates to a Section 133(6) notice. However, the assessee provided evidence that S.V. Associates did respond, and the commission paid to Vikram Singh Jangid was incorrectly attributed to S.V. Associates in the Tribunal's order. The Tribunal acknowledged these errors and corrected the record.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 707123 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 08-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 09-06-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B.P. SRIVASTAVA
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRUNJAL SHAH
• Section: 133(6)

Judgement Text

"THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH Before Dr. BRR Kumar, Vice President And Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member Kastwell Foundries, 46/A, GIDC Estate Phase 1, Nr. Kiran Bus Stop, Vatva- Ahmedabad-382445 PAN: AABFK9088K (Appellant) Vs The Dy. CIT, Circle-3(2), Ahmedabad (Respondent) Assessee by: Ms. Shrunjal Shah, A.R. Revenue by: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 04-07-2025 Date of pronouncement : 08-07-2025 आदेश/ORDER Per Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member: This Misc. Application filed by the assessee in respect of the order dated 15.04.2025 passed by the Tribunal. 2. The Ld. AR submitted that there is a mistake apparent from record while disposing Ground Nos. 5 and 6. The Ld. AR submitted that the disallowance of commission expenses of Rs.5,37,822/- paid to S.V. Associates, the Tribunal gave a finding that “except S.V. Associates the other two parties have responded to Section 133(6) notice and therefore the CIT(A) was M.A. No. 47/Ahd/2025 (In ITA No. 1396/Ahd/2024) Assessment Year 2012-13 M.A. No. 47/Ahd/2025 Kastwel Foundries, A.Y. 2012-13 2 rightly disallowed the commission expenses of Rs. 5,37,822/- paid to S.V. Associates.” The said finding is a mistake apparent on record as the said S.V. Associates has replied to Section 133(6) notice as evidenced from the remand report dated 13.08.2018 mentioned in the order of the CIT(A). The Ld. AR submitted that reply was received from S. Vasudevan, S. V. Associates and also the Agreement between the Kastwel Foundries and S. V. Associates dated 11.12.2006 was produced in the reply to notice u/s 133(6) with ledger and other documents. Merely because the assessee had not collected such old agreement dated 11.12.2006, the genuineness of the transaction cannot be questioned. A complete statement of the commission paid by the assessee was also produced by the assessee. 3.1 As regards to disallowance of commission expenses of Rs. 1,71,750/- paid to Vikram Singh Jangid, the Ld. AR submitted that the said commission expenses were pertaining to commission paid to Vikram Singh Jangid and not S.V. Associates. The assessee furnished details of such commission. The said party is based on Goraya Region of Punjab and copy of address and PAN was also produced to the authorities. Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that the same is mistake apparent on record. 4. The Ld. DR relied upon the order dated 15.04.2025 passed by the Tribunal and submitted that the assessee is seeking review of the order. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. From perusal of the records it can be seen that S. V. Associates had replied the M.A. No. 47/Ahd/2025 Kastwel Foundries, A.Y. 2012-13 3 notice issued u/s 133(6) of the Act. Therefore, to that extent there is mistake apparent on record in para 11 of the order dated 15.04.2025. As regards to Vikram Singh Jangid, there is no response as well as there is no confirmation filed by the assessee. Merely providing PAN and address will not prove the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the said parties which was rightly taken into consideration but instead of the name Vikram Singh Jangid, the name S. V. Associates has mentioned in para 12, which is mistake apparent on record. Thus, order dated 15.04.2025 passed by the Tribunal is recalled to the extent of para para 11 and para 12 and the said paras are rectified as follows: “Para 5. As regards to Ground No. 5, relating to disallowance of commission expenses of Rs. 5,37,822, the assessee submitted the details of commission paid with the name address and phone numbers. In fact, the CIT(A) has mentioned that S.V. Associates has responded the notice u/s 133(6) and confirmed the commission paid to the said party. Before the CIT(A) except Vikram Singh Jangid other two parties have responded, therefore, the CIT(A) was not right in disallowing the commission expenses in respect of S.V. Assocaites and Ajay Duggal. Ground No. 5 is allowed.” “Para 12. As regards to Ground No. 6, relating to disallowance of commission expenses of Rs. 1,71,750/-, it is pertinent to note that Vikram Singh Jangid, has not given any response to notice u/s 133(6) as well as there is no confirmation filed by the assessee of this party. Merely providing PAN and address will not prove the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the said parties. Thus, to that extent the CIT(A) was right in disallowing the said commission expenses. Hence Ground No. 6 is dismissed.” M.A. No. 47/Ahd/2025 Kastwel Foundries, A.Y. 2012-13 4 Thus, Misc. Application filed by the assessee is allowed. 6. In result, Misc. Application filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 08-07-2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. BRR Kumar) (Suchitra Kamble) Vice President Judicial Member Ahmedabad : Dated 08/07/2025 आदेश क\u0006 \u0007\bत ल प अ\u000fे षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील\u0012य अ\u0013धकरण, अहमदाबाद "