Shivsu Canadian Clear Waters Ltd., CHENNAI V. ITO Corporate Circle 6(2), CHENNAI

MA 34/CHNY/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3289 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-08-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 04-08-2022
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 20-02-2020
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, ‘बी’ यायपीठ, चे नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI ी वी. द ु गा राव, या यक सद य एवं ी जी. मंज ु नाथ, लेखा सद य के सम$ BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M i s c. Ap p l i c ati on No. 3 4/ Ch n y/ 2 0 2 0 [ I n I T A N o . 7 9 7 / C h n y / 2 0 1 9 ] ( नधा रणवष / A ss e ss m en t Yea r : 2 01 4 - 15 ) M/s. Shivsu Canadian Clear Waters Ltd. 6B2, II Floor, Parivakkam Road, Leelavathy Nagar, Senneerkuppam, Poonamallee,Chennai-600 056. V s The Income Tax Officer, Corporate Circle-6(2), Chennai. P A N : A A I C S 2 57 4 C ( ाथ क /Petitioner) ( यथ /Respondent) ाथ क क ओरसे/ Petitioner by : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate यथ क ओरसे/Respondent by : Mr. AR V Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT स ु नवाई क तार ख/D a t e o f h e a r i n g : 05.08.2022 घोषणा क तार ख /D a t e o f P r o n o u n c e m e n t : 05.08.2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER G. MANJUNATHA, AM: The present Miscellaneous Petition filed by the assessee is directed against order of this Tribunal dated 23.12.2019 in ITA No.797/Chny/2019 relevant to the assessment year 2014- 15. The assessee has narrated facts of its case and mistakes stated to be apparent on record from the order of the Tribunal dated 23.12.2019 in ITA No.797/Chny/2019. 2. We have heard both the parties and considered relevant contents of miscellaneous application filed by the assessee. 2 M.A. No.34/Chny/2020 The learned A.R for the assessee submitted that there is mistake in the order of the Tribunal, inasmuch as the Tribunal failed to adjudicate ground no.5 of the assessee on the issue of the learned CIT(A) not adjudicating specific issues raised during the appeal in writing vide written submissions dated 24.01.2019 with regard to contention of the assessee on applicability of provisions of section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the impugned credits. Although, there is a specific ground, the Tribunal failed to adjudicate the issue and thus, submitted that said mistake constitute mistake apparent on record, which needs be rectified u/s.254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. Per contra, the learned DR for the Revenue submitted that the Tribunal has set aside the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for further verification in light of arguments of the learned counsel for the assessee out of total additions made by the Assessing Officer towards unexplained credit u/s.68 of the Act, few credits pertaining to previous financial year and same cannot be added as unexplained income of the 3 M.A. No.34/Chny/2020 assessee for the impugned assessment year. Since, the Tribunal has set aside the issue, the assessee can very well take arguments before the Assessing Officer and explain its case and thus, there is no merit in the Misc. Application filed by the assessee and hence, same needs to be dismissed. 4. We have heard both the parties and considered relevant contents of the Misc. Application filed by the assessee. We find that the Assessing Officer has made additions towards current liability on the ground that the assessee could not establish genuineness of credits with necessary evidences. The first appellate authority has allowed partial relief to the assessee, wherever the assessee could get necessary details, including confirmation from the parties and on further appeal, before the Tribunal, the Tribunal, on the basis of additional evidences filed by the assessee set aside the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to re-examine credits to ascertain whether credits pertain to impugned assessment year or earlier financial years. However, it was not the case of the assessee before the authorities, including the Tribunal that 4 M.A. No.34/Chny/2020 the Assessing Officer has invoked provisions of section 41(1) of the Act, and the assessee has challenged said findings of the Assessing Officer. In fact, the assessee all along claims that these current liabilities represent advance received from customers. From the above, what is clear is that the Assessing Officer has made additions towards current liabilities u/s.68 of the Act, because the assessee could not discharge its onus of identifying credits and establishing genuineness of transactions. Further, the Tribunal has given one more opportunity to the assessee to prove its case on the contention of credits pertain to impugned assessment year and credits pertain to earlier financial years . From the above, it is very clear that findings recorded by the Tribunal is on the basis of facts brought out by the Assessing Officer in light of arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the assessee and thus, we are of the considered view that there is no error in the order passed by the Tribunal dated 23.12.2019 and thus, we dismiss Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee. 5 M.A. No.34/Chny/2020 5. In the result, Miscellaneous Petition filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 5 th August, 2022 Sd/- Sd/- ( वी. द ु गा राव) (जी. मंज ु नाथ) (V.Durga Rao) (G.Manjunatha) या यक सद!य /Judicial Member लेखा सद!य / Accountant Member चे नई/Chennai, %दनांक/Dated 5 th August, 2022 DS आदेश क त)ल*प अ-े*षत/Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. आयकर आय ु .त (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकर आय ु .त/CIT 5. *वभागीय त न3ध/DR 6. गाड फाईल/GF.