SHARAD SINHA,LACKNOW V. AO,NFAC, DELHI

ITA 506/PAT/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Sharad Sinha against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2016-17. The primary contention revolves around the classification of income received by the assessee from M/s. Mentors Eduserve as professional receipts rather than salary. The revenue argued that the assessee was paid salary, not professional charges, and thus disallowed the expenditures claimed against this income. The tribunal noted that the evidences found during the search/survey operations at M/s. Mentors Eduserve were not presented to the assessee for rebuttal, which led to the decision to remand the case for further proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 33474 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHWANI KR. SINGAL
• Keywords: TDS
• Section: 250; 194J

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “PATNA” BENCH, PATNA VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 506/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sharad Sinha Flat No. 3/104, Deepak Apartment, Sahara State, Jankipuram, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh-226021. (PAN: BHHPS1118L) Vs Assessing Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : N o n e Respondent by : Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT Date of Hearing : 01.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 01.04.2025 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”] vide order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1065546153(1) dated 11.06.2024 passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for AY 2016-17. 2. The Ld. AR was not properly uniformed, therefore, the Ld. AR for the assessee was not heard. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT appeared on behalf of the revenue. 3. It was submitted by the Ld. DR that the assessee is working for M/s. Mentors Eduserve. It was the submission that the assessee had claimed income received from M/s. Mentors Eduserve as professional receipt. It was the submission that there was survey/search in the case of M/s. 2 ITA No.506/Pat/2024 Sharad Sinha, AY: 2016-17 Mentors Eduserve group and it was found that the assessee was being paid salary and not professional charges. It was the submission that as salary was being paid and it was noticed that the assessee has claimed expenditure against the said salary received, the expenditure claimed was disallowed. It was the submission that mere deducting TDS under section 194J would not make the salary receipts of the assessee as professional receipt. It was the submission that the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) are liable to be upheld. 4. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. One of the primary issues raised by the assessee is that evidences found by the revenue during the search/survey operations in the premises of M/s. Mentors Eduserve and it was being used against the assessee has not been put to assessee for his rebuttal. A further perusal of the grounds of appeal shows that the assessee has categorically claimed that there was professional service agreement between the assessee and the Mentors Eduserve group. A perusal of the assessment order shows that though show cause notice was issued to the assessee on 10.03.2022 the assessee has not furnished any information. This being so, in the interest of justice the issues in this appeal is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication after granting the assessee sufficient opportunities of being heard. The Assessing Officer shall provide the copies of any agreement which is proposed to use against the assessee for his comments/reply, if any, before completing the setting aside assessment. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court. Sd/- (George Mathan) Judicial Member Dated: 1st APRIL, 2025 3 ITA No.506/Pat/2024 Sharad Sinha, AY: 2016-17 JD, Sr. P.S. Copy to: 1. The Appellant: Shri Sharad Sinha 2. The Respondent. Assessing Officer NFAC, Delhi 3. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata 6. Guard file. True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata. "