SHRI BHOLA FOOD PRODUCTS,HARDOI V. DCIT/ACIT (CENTRAL CIRCLE-2), LUCKNOW

ITA 90/LKW/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Bhola Food Products, the appellant, contesting an addition of Rs.11,10,678/- to their income, which was initially disallowed by the Assessing Officer and partially relieved by the CIT(A). The primary contention in the appeal was the additional Rs.2,50,000/- which the CIT(A) sustained as an estimated interest component due to a lapse of time between financial years 2020-21 and 2022-23. The ITAT found that the CIT(A) did not provide a legal basis or reasonable estimation for this addition, leading to the allowance of the appeal and deletion of the contested amount.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 772634 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-08-2025
• 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: REVENUE DID NOT EXPRESS ANY; PRAJESH SRIVASTAVA
• Assessee Lawyers: MAHENDRA KUMAR; F
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"I.T.A. No.90/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2021-22 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH ‘B’, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUBHASH MALGURIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.90/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Shri Bhola Food Products Near Income Tax Office, Nagheta Road, Hardoi-241001 PAN:ABNFA0789N Vs. DCIT/ACIT Central Circle-2, Lucknow. (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R PER SUBHASH MALGURIA, J.M. This appeal vide I.T.A. No.90/Lkw/2025 has been filed by assessee for assessment year 2021-22 against impugned appellate order dated 15/05/2024 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1064897659(1) passed by learned Addl/JCIT(A), Bengaluru [“Addl/JCIT(A)” for short]. 2. This appeal has been filed by the assessee, beyond time limit prescribed under section 253(3) of IT Act. The assessee has submitted application duly supported by affidavit for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal pleading that the delay was unintentional and beyond the control Appellant by Shri Mahendra Kumar, F.C.A. Respondent by Shri Prajesh Srivastava, Sr. D.R. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.90/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2021-22 2 of the assessee and has requested to admit the appeal for hearing. The learned Sr. Departmental Representative for Revenue did not express any objection to assessee’s application for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal. In view of the foregoing, and in specific facts and circumstances of the present appeal before us, the delay in filing of this appeal is condoned; and the appeal is admitted for hearing. 3. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee firm filed its return of income on 24/01/2022 declaring total income of Rs.6,80,23,110/-. The Assessing Officer processed the assessment and passed assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act on 31/12/2022 determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.6,91,33,790/- and made addition of Rs.11,10,678/- by disallowing claimed of expenses. Being aggrieved with the disallowance of expenses of Rs.11,10,678/-, the assessee went in appeal before the CIT(A), who has allowed part relief to the assessee. Aggrieved further, the assessee has filed the present appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 4. We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. The learned CIT(A) has accepted the assessee’s contention that the aforesaid amount of Rs.11,10,678/- was wrongly disallowed by the Assessing Officer. The relevant portion of the order of the learned CIT(A) is reproduced below: Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.90/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2021-22 3 Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.90/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2021-22 4 However, the learned CIT(A) arbitrarily confirmed the addition of Rs.2,50,000/- on the ground that there was lapse of time between the two entries for financial year 2020-21 and 2022-23. The learned CIT(A) was of the view that the interest component was to be sustained. She estimated the interest component at Rs.2,50,000/- and sustained the addition of Rs.2,50,000/-. However, there is no discussion in the impugned order of learned CIT(A) how the aforesaid amount on account of interest can be disallowed under provisions of law. Further, there is no discussion on the manner in which the aforesaid amount of Rs.2,50,000/- was estimated. The addition cannot be sustained in these facts and circumstances in the absence of legal justification for the same and also in the absence of reasonable basis for estimation. In the specific facts and circumstances of the present case, Revenue has failed to make a good case for the addition of aforesaid amount of Rs.2,50,000/-. The learned D.R. also did not extend any assistance in this regard and merely relied on the order of the learned CIT(A). In view of the foregoing, the addition of Rs.2,50,000/- sustained by learned CIT(A) is directed to be deleted. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed. (Order pronounced in the open court on 28/08/2025) Sd/. Sd/. (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) (SUBHASH MALGURIA) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated:28/08/2025 *Singh Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.90/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2021-22 5 Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. Concerned CIT 4. D.R. ITAT, Lucknow Printed from counselvise.com "