MSG ALL TRADING INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED,SHAHDRA V. DCIT, CIRCLE-11(1), DELHI, DELHI

ITA 3257/DEL/2023

AI Insights

The case involves MSG All Trading International Private Ltd., the appellant, contesting an assessment order from the Assessing Officer (AO) which significantly increased their assessed income for the Assessment Year 2017-18 compared to their returned income. The AO had added unexplained credits and other entries to the appellant's income. The appellant's appeal to the CIT(A) was largely unsuccessful, with the CIT(A)'s order being a copy of the previous year's order, leading to the current appeal. Both parties agreed that the CIT(A)'s order contained errors and that the matter should be remitted back to the AO for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 126208 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUNIL KUMAR YADAV
• Assessee Lawyers: VED JAIN
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Unexplained cash credit; Remitted; National Faceless Appeal; Commissioner; Statistical purposes; Restored; Deleted

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3257/DEL/2023 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) MSG All Trading International Private Ltd., vs. DCIT, Circle 11 (1), Office No.2, 3rd Floor, Delhi. 80, East Azad Nagar, Raghuvarpura, Shahdara, Delhi – 110 051. (PAN : AAJCM6792K) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate Shri Aman Garg, CA Ms. Ishika Dua, CA REVENUE BY : Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 23.04.2025 Date of Order : 23.04.2025 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : 1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 19.09.2023 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. At the outset, ld.AR of the assessee submitted that in the present case, the Assessing Officer has passed the assessment order dated 29.12.2019 assessing the income of the appellant at Rs. 51,13,33,120/- as against the 2 ITA No.3257/DEL/2023 returned income of Rs. 1,34,78,260/-. He submitted that the AO in Para 6 at Page 12 has referred to the total credit in bank of Rs. 88,90,07,298/- and after reducing the contra entry cheque return entry debtor realization to the extent of Rs.139,19,82,438/-, had made addition of Rs.49,70,24,860/- as unexplained credit in the bank and this amount also include an amount of Rs.81,00,000/- as unsecured loan discussed by the AO on Page 6 of the assessment order and also Rs.4,67,50,000/- in respect of share application money discussed by the AO on Page 9 of the assessment order. He further submitted that the AO has further made addition of Rs. 8,50,000/- on account of cash deposit during the period 01.11.2016 to 31.12.2016. 3. Ld. AR submitted that against the above order, the assessee filed an appeal before ld. CIT(A) and raised various grounds which are stated by the ld. CIT(A) on Page 2 to 5 of his order. He submitted that the ld. CIT(A) upto Page 37 has quoted the Assessment Order and Remand Report. He further submitted that however, from Page 38 onwards, the entire order is copy pasted that of the preceding assessment year i.e. AY 2016-17, as is evident from the Assessment Order for the AY 2016-17 where income of Rs.1,41,96,2501- was assessed. He submitted that the copy of the ld. CIT(A) order for preceding AY 2016-17 is placed on 3 ITA No.3257/DEL/2023 record to demonstrate that what is stated by the CIT(A) from Page 38 to Page 58 top para is verbatim copy of order passed for the preceding AY 2016-17. He further submitted that at Page 58, ld. CIT(A) has discussed the addition of Rs. 8,50,000/- for this relevant assessment year and the same has been deleted. He submitted that thus, there is no finding and no discussion by the ld. CIT (A) in respect of addition of Rs.49,70,24,8601- being the credit in bank account added by the assessing officer for the year under consideration and this is apparently a mistake of cut and paste where the order passed by the CIT(A) for preceding AY 2016-17 got cut and pasted from Page 38 to 58. Accordingly, he prayed that the matter be restored back to the Assessing Officer. 4. On the other hand, ld. DR of the Revenue agreed with the above submissions of the ld. AR of the assessee. 5. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observed the findings of the ld. CIT (A) and find cogency in the submissions of the ld. AR of the assessee that this is apparently a mistake of cut and paste where the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) for preceding AY 2016-17 got cut and pasted from Pages 38 to 58. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that this issue may be remitted back to the file 4 ITA No.3257/DEL/2023 of Assessing Officer to redo the assessment de novo after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and both the counsels also agreed with this proposition. . Assessee is directed through his counsel to fully cooperate with the AO during the proceedings. We hold and direct accordingly. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 23rd day of April, 2025 after the conclusion of hearing. Sd/- sd/- (ANUBHAV SHRMA) (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 23.04.2025 TS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI "