SALASAR ASSOCIATES,THANE V. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, THANE WEST

ITA 5866/MUM/2024

AI Insights

M/s. Salasar Associates appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Center/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which had dismissed their earlier appeal due to non-compliance. The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not appear for the hearing, and the notice was returned undelivered. The Tribunal also considered a delay in filing the appeal due to health issues of a partner in the firm, which was condoned. However, on merits, the Tribunal agreed with the lower authorities that the assessee failed to prove the identity, creditworthiness of subscribers, and genuineness of transactions related to the additions made.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 33851 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KIRAN UNAVEKAR; LD.
• Section: 143(3); 250; 13; 101

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.5866/M/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-24 M/s. Salasar Associates, G-3, Giriraj, Salasar Brijbhoomi, Temba Hospital Road, Bhayander West, Thane Maharashtra – 401 101 PAN: ABUFS6269G Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Room no.27, 6th floor, B-wing, Ashar IT park, near Ambika Nagar, Waghle Industrial Estate Road No.16-Z, Thane (W) Pin Code – 400 604 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Kiran Unavekar, Ld. Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 16.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 14.02.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member: This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 28.08.2024, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2013-14. ITA No.5866/M/2024 M/s. Salasar Associates 2 2. Notice sent to the Assessee for the date of hearing on dated 16-01-2025 has been returned back by the Postal Authority with the remarks “left” meaning thereby that the Assessee is not situated at the address mentioned in the form 36. Hence, this Court is inclined to decide this appeal as ex-parte. 3. At the outset, it is observed that there is a delay of 13 days in filing the instant appeal, on which the Assessee has claimed that the partner responsible for overseeing and managing the legal and financial affairs of the business, was suffering from serious health issues. The partner’s health condition which required immediate and ongoing medical attention, significantly impacted, the ability to attend the important tasks, including filing of the appeal and therefore the delay of 13 days in filing the instant appeal has been occurred, which was neither intentional nor malafide or willful but beyond the control of the Assessee and therefore the delay may kindly be condoned. On the contrary the Ld. D.R. refuted the claim of the Assessee. Considering the delay as miniscule and based on the health issue as genuine and bonafide, the delay is condoned. 4. Coming to the merits of the case, it is observed that the Assessing Officer (in short ‘the AO’) vide Assessment order dated 18.03.2016 u/s 143(3) of the Act, has made the addition of Rs.9,35,090/- (Rs.1,35,000/- + Rs.8,00,090/-). 5. The Assessee, being aggrieved against the assessment order dated 18.03.2016 and making the addition preferred first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner. However, in spite of granting multiple opportunities, eventually made no compliance and therefore in the constrained circumstances, the Ld. Commissioner dismissed the appeal of the Assessee. ITA No.5866/M/2024 M/s. Salasar Associates 3 6. This Court has given thoughtful considerations to the orders passed by the authorities below. The Assessee has failed to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the subscribers and the genuineness of the transactions and therefore the AO made the addition of Rs.1,35,000/- on account of interest payment made on unsecured loans raised from M/s. Kinjal Gems Pvt. Ltd. The Assessee before the Ld. Commissioner as well, failed to file any documents or any submissions. Therefore, there is no infirmity in the decisions of the authorities below in making and sustaining the addition of Rs.1,35,000/-. Thus, need no interference. 7. This Court further observe that the Assessee has claimed a sum of Rs.8,00,090/- as service tax credit w/off on which the AO asked the Assessee to produce the documentary evidence to justify the same, however, the Assessee, till passing of the assessment order dated 18.03.2016 by the AO and even during the appellate proceedings before the Ld. Commissioner, has not provided any details. Therefore, in the absence of documentary evidence in support of such payments, the payments cannot be said to be expenses incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes as determined by the authorities below and therefore correctly made and affirmed such disallowance of Rs.8,00,090/-, which needs no interference. Thus, on the aforesaid analyzations, this Court is inclined not to interfere in the orders passed by the authorities below and consequently dismissing the appeal of the Assessee, however, with liberty to the Assessee to seek recalling of this order by substantiating the reason of non-appearance before this Court. ITA No.5866/M/2024 M/s. Salasar Associates 4 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 14.02.2025. Sd/- (NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY) JUDICIAL MEMBER * Kishore, Sr. P.S. Copy to: The Appellant The Respondent The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai The DR Concerned Bench //True Copy// By Order Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai. "