SUBHASH AUTOMOBILES,GREATER NOIDA V. ITO, WARD-3(4), NOIDA

ITA 3727/DEL/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Subhash Automobiles appealing against the order of the CIT(A), which upheld the addition of Rs. 10,36,741 to the assessee's income for the assessment year 2012-13. The addition was initially made by the AO under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, claiming that the assessee had not disclosed certain receipts in their profit and loss account, despite claiming TDS on them. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to non-response from the assessee. The Tribunal, noting the absence of representation before the CIT(A), decided to remit the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471522 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: VINEET GARG
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; TDS
• Section: 143(3); 154

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, ITA NO. 3727/Del/2023 A.YR. : 2012-13 SUBHASH AUTOMOBILES HFA-2 Udyog Kendra, Opp. Sutiyana Mandir, Greater Noida Uttar Pradesh-201306 (PAN: AAZFS2715B) VS. ITO, WARD 3(4), NOIDA, A-2D, SECTOR-24, NOIDA, UTTAR PRADESH-201301 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by : Sh. Vineet Garg, Adv. Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR. Date of hearing : 20.02.2025 Date of pronouncement : 20.02.2025 ORDER The Assessee has filed the instant Appeal against the Order of the Ld. NFAC, New Delhi dated 10.10.2023, relating to assessment year 2012-13 on the following grounds:- 1. The ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in upholding the impugned order of the ld. AO issued u/s. 154, which is contrary to law, equity and justice and facts and material on record. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the addition of Rs. 10,36,741/- made by the AO, without appreciating that the PAN in question was erroneously allotted to another assessee, namely, 2 | P a g e Shiv Sai Automobiles. As a result, the receipts reflected in 26AS pertain to the said other assessee and not the appellant. 3. The appellant prays for leave to amend, modify, or introduce any additional grounds of appeal at any time before the final date of hearing before the ITAT. 4. The order passed by the CIT(A), NFAC alongwith the order of the AO u/s. 154 may kindly be declared null and void ab initio. Alternatively, any such other order as may be deemed fit by your honours in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return on 25.9.2012 declaring total income of Rs. 3,11,200/-. The source of income of the assessee is business from trading in diesel, petrol, lubricants etc. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. Assessment u/s. 143(3) on 16.1.2015 at the total income of Rs. 3,61,200/-. Later on, order u/s. 154 was passed in this case on 11.3.2019 making further addition of Rs. 10,36,741/-. So, the total income u/s. 154 / 143(3) was determined at Rs. 13,97,940/-. The reason for rectifying the order was that the assesee had claimed TDS of Rs. 20,736/- but it did not offer the corresponding receipt / income of Rs. 10,36,741/-. Order u/s. 154 was passed after issue of notice u/s. 154 and considering the relevant reply of the assessee. The AO has concluded the issue by writing as under in para 2 of the order:- “I have examined the reply of the assessee, which is not tenable. In the reply assessee has accepted that assesssee has claimed the TDS and not disclosed the receipts of Rs. 10,36,741/- in the profit and loss account. Further, assessee has tried to take a shelter of mis-match of TDS details. In this regard, it is pertinent to mention here that if the TDS and receipts does not pertain to assessee, the assessee should write the tax deductor in 3 | P a g e this regard, but assessee has claimed TDS and not offered the receipt of Rs. 10,36,741/- for taxation in the profit and loss account. Keeping in view the above facts, unexplained disclosed receipt of Rs. 10,36,741/- is added to the income of the assessee. 3. Upon assessee’s appeal, Ld. CIT(A) noted that assessee has not responded, hence, he proceeded to dismiss the appeal by upholding the action of the AO. 4. Against the aforesaid order, Assessee is in appeal before me 5. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the records. I note that it was the prayer of the Assessee’s counsel that since there was no representation before the CIT(A), hence, an opportunity of being heard to be given to the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) to canvass its case properly. Ld. DR agreed to this proposition. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the issues in dispute are remitted back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with the directions to consider the issues in dispute afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee for which the Ld. DR has no objection. 6. In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 20/02/2025 in the open court. SD/- (SHAMIM YAHYA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SR Bhatnagar Copy forwarded to:- 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT Assistant Registrar "