MAHESH ,BIDAR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BIDAR

ITA 495/BANG/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Mahesh, Durga Trading Co., the appellant, contesting an income assessment by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bidar, for the assessment year 2021-22. Initially, the assessee declared an income of \\u20b927,29,840, but the AO assessed it at \\u20b912,37,55,845 due to lack of supporting documents for various disallowances. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, leading the assessee to appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument that necessary documents were not considered by the lower authorities and remitted the matter back to the AO for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 360727 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUBRAMANIAN
• Assessee Lawyers: MADHUKESHWAR HEGDE
• Keywords: Set aside; Additional evidence; Reasonable cause
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 495/Bang/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Mahesh, Durga Trading Co., Plot No.146, Bhalki, Bidar. PAN – DECPM 1156 J Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Bidar. . APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Madhukeshwar Hegde, CA Revenue by : Shri Subramanian, JCIT (DR) Date of hearing : 14.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 23.05.2025 O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi dated 27/08/2024 in DIN No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/ 2024-25/1068010132(1) for the assessment year 2021-22. 2. In the present case, there was a delay of 135 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. At the time of the hearing, the learned counsel submitted that the delay in filing the appeal was due to the assessee’s health. In support of this contention, the Ld. AR submitted hospital certificates justifying the genuine reason which prevented the ITA No.495/Bang/2025 Page 2 of 5 . assessee from filing the appeal within the prescribed time. Accordingly, the learned AR requested that the delay be condoned and that the issue be decided on merit. 3. On the other hand, the learned DR, considering the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal, did not raise any objection if the delay is condoned and the appeal is decided on merit. 4. After having heard both parties and perused the materials available on record, we find that there was reasonable cause which prevented the assessee from filing the appeal within the stipulated time. Accordingly, we condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the issue on merit. Merits of the Case: 5. At the outset, we note that the assessee filed the return of income declaring an income of ₹27,29,840.00 only. However, the assessment was framed under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act, determining the income at ₹12,37,55,845.00. The AO, for want of supporting documents, made the disallowance under various heads, as detailed below: “In response to the above show cause notice the assessee has not uploaded any details till the date of this order. In view of the above, the assessment is finalized as under: ITA No.495/Bang/2025 Page 3 of 5 . 6. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal to the learned CIT(A), who also upheld the findings of the AO, holding that the assessee had not furnished the necessary documents. 7. Being further aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before us. 8. Before us, the learned AR filed a paper book running from pages 1 to 288 and contended that all the requisite details had already been filed by the assessee, but the same were not considered by the authorities below while making the disallowance of purchases and expenses. Accordingly, the learned AR prayed that the matter be remitted back to the AO for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law. The learned AR also sought liberty to file additional evidence in support of the claims made in the return of income. 9. The learned DR, on the other hand, did not raise any objection to setting aside the issue to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication in accordance with law. ITA No.495/Bang/2025 Page 4 of 5 . 10. We have heard the rival contentions of both parties and perused the materials available on record. From the preceding discussion, we note that the assessee had not earlier filed the copies of the confirmations and ledger accounts of the suppliers, leading to disallowance by the AO, which was upheld by the learned CIT(A). 10.1 Now, the assessee has filed before us copies of vendor confirmations and their ledger accounts, placed on pages 218 to 288 of the paper book. In our considered view, verification of these documents is essential at the level of the AO. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we set aside the issue to the AO for fresh adjudication in accordance with law. 10.2 It is also directed that the assessee shall ensure necessary compliance during the proceedings before the AO and avoid any unwarranted adjournments. The assessee is also at liberty to file any other piece of evidence in support of the claims made in the return of income concerning the disputed items. Hence, the ground of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 11. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in court on 23rd day of May, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (KESHAV DUBEY) (WASEEM AHMED) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore Dated, 23rd May, 2025 ITA No.495/Bang/2025 Page 5 of 5 . / vms / Copy to: 1. The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 6. Guard file By order Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore "