SHELENDER KUMAR JAIN,DELHI V. ACIT, CIRCLE-55(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 4477/DEL/2019

AI Insights

The case involves Shelender Kumar Jain, the proprietor of M/s Amar Bharti & Rashtriya Besahara Jan, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-38, New Delhi. The appeal arose from an order passed under sections 143(3)/263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the ACIT, Circle-55(1), New Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2012-13. The primary issues in the appeal included the disallowance of Rs.34,20,000 as certain payments to creditors were not reflected in their bank accounts, and various disallowances on expenses and rent. The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer did not adequately verify the claims and that the disallowances were made on an adhoc basis without proper justification.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 793290 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 4 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 16-05-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HARPREET KAUR HANSRA
• Assessee Lawyers: RAKESH JAIN; GURJEET SINGH
• Keywords: TDS; Revision of order
• Section: 143(3); 263; 40A(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER ITA No.4477/Del/2019 [Assessment Year: 2012-13] Shelender Kumar Jain, 76-B, DDA Flats, Jhilmil Colony, Bihari Colony, Shahdara, Delhi-110095 Vs ACIT, Circle-55(1), Delhi PAN-ADJPJ4984G Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri Rakesh Jain, Adv. & Shri Gurjeet Singh, Adv. Revenue by Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 27.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 24.09.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM, This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against order dated 18.03.2019 of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-38, New Delhi, in Appeal No.CIT(A), Delhi-38/10318/17-18, arising out of order dated 31.12.2017 passed u/s 143(3)/263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the ACIT, Circle-55(1), New Delhi, pertaining to Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The return of assessee was processed u/s 143(3) of the Act at income of Rs.13,83,620/- and subsequently vide order u/s 263 of the Act, the Assessing Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.4477/Del/2019 Officer was asked to verify and scrutinize certain issues, which were examined by the Assessing Officer in the present impugned order leading to addition of Rs.34,20,000/- on the basis that certain payments shown as payable by the creditors during the year are not reflected in their bank accounts and are thus subject to the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act. A disallowance of Rs.15,00,218/- was made on account of various expenses @10%, and a disallowance of Rs.7,50,000/- was made as disallowance of rent paid to the extent of 50%. 3. The ld. CIT(A) has sustained the same partly for which assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising following grounds; 4. On hearing both sides, we find that primarily the ld. Authorized Representatives of the both sides, rely the cases of their sides as casted below. 5. As regards ground no.1, arising out of disallowance of Rs.34,20,000/-, we find that the assessee is a proprietor of M/s Amar Bharti & Rashtriya Besahara Jan, small Hindi daily newspaper. During the year, the assessee has shown gross turnover of Rs.42,73,36,431/- and gross profit of Rs.17,18,07,977/- with gross profit rate of 40.20%. During the year, the assessee has shown net profit of Rs.73,43,310/- and after scrutiny assessment, income was assessed at net total income of Rs.1,31,83,620/- and thereafter in u/s 263 proceedings, certain directions were issued to verify the sundry creditors. The Assessing Officer required assessee to produce the sundry creditors and statements on oath Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.4477/Del/2019 were taken which may part of the assessment order. It comes up that sundry creditors specifically said that mode of payment was bank/cheque. During the course of the hearing, the ld. AR has filed before us the details showing payment made to creditors through bank corresponding to bank statement filed in the paper book. It was pointed out that in case of Swati Enterprises, an amount of Rs.65,000/- is shown in the ledger of the party and the bank statement. In case of City Publicity, Rs.55,000/- were cash payments, however, there is a ledger entry. Further, in case of Forever Advertising, there are two entries of Rs.30,000/- and Rs.70,000/- which are cash payments but same also have corresponding ledger entries and apart from that remaining are reflected in ledger as well as in the bank statements. 5.1 We are of the considered view that parties were identified and there is nothing to doubt genuineness of payment and creditors in the their own statements have supported the assessee, thus the finding of the ld. CIT(A) in sustaining the addition on the basis that payments were made in cash and were not reflected in the bank account as no evidences were produced, justifies that the issue be restored to the files of the Assessing Officer to give assessee an opportunity afresh to bring evidences indicating the payments were reflected in the bank accounts of the respective parties or otherwise justified as cash payments. Accordingly, this ground is allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.4477/Del/2019 6. In ground no.2, we find that the assessee has debited an amount of Rs.40,71,256/- under the head hording material purchase in his profit & loss account and a disallowance of 10% was made by the Assessing Officer. We find substance in the assertion of the assessee that when the Assessing Officer has verified the purchases from sundry creditors, there was no reason to disturb the same. The adhoc disallowance is not justified. Ground is sustained. 7. As regards ground no.3; AO has made the addition of 15% of rent expenditure Rs. 50,00,000/- i.e. Rs.7,50,000/- for the reason that assessee has not submitted any rent agreement & it is difficult to establish the genuineness of the expenses and the non applicability of TDS on the same. In this regard, it is submitted for assesse that assessee has submitted rent agreement for most of the properties. However, few properties where rent is small, so no TDS is required to be deducted as per law & similarly assessee has not made any rent agreement also AO has made the addition of 15% of rent expenditure without any basis merely on estimation basis which is not justified as the assessee has already shown net profit rate of 3.08% on turnover of Rs.42.73 crores. Moreover, AO has verified various rented properties, then AO can also verify these properties which AO has not done. The nature of work of assesse justifies renting properties for distribution of publications and same may be of petty landlords or even licence fee for short users. In any case adhoc disallowance of such an expense is not justified. The ground is sustained. Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No.4477/Del/2019 8. Accordingly the appeal is allowed partly with consequences to follow. Order pronounced in the open court on 24th September, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- - [KRINWANT SAHAY] [ANUBHAV SHARMA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 24.09.2025 Shekhar Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. PCIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "