CHANDRAMOULI KINNERA,SECUNDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-10(4), HYDERABAD

Date of Hearing : 06/04/2021 Date of Pronouncement : 22/06/2021 O R D E R PER S.S. GODARA, J.M. This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2015-16 arises against the CIT(A)-6 Hyderabad’s order dated 30.09.2019 passed in case no.10195/2017-18 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for short ‘the Act’].

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

Shri Chandramouli Kinnera, Sec’bad.

3.1. The Revenue’s case before us is that the assessee could not prove identity, genuineness and credit worthiness of the said parties which formed main reason for the CIT(A) to confirm the impugned addition. Faced with this situation and more particularly in view of the fact that the assessee had submitted list of the creditor parties which could not be effectively put for factual verification, we deem it proper to restore the instant former issue back to the file of Assessing Officer with a rider that it shall be assessee’s duty to prove genuineness and creditworthiness of all the said creditors / parties within three effective opportunities, at his own risk and responsibility only. This former substantive ground is accepted for statistical purposes in above terms.

Shri Chandramouli Kinnera, Sec’bad.

4.1. Learned counsel’s only plea is that this assessee has nowhere been treated as the assessee in default as per sec.201(1) first proviso r.w.s. 40(a)(ia) second proviso and, therefore, the impugned disallowance deserves to be deleted. He fails to dispute that there is no material in case file which could indicate the recipient(s) concerned to have been assessed qua the impugned rental income. We therefore deem it proper to restore instant latter issue back to Assessing Officer to examine afresh in light of sec.40(a)(ia) second proviso. Ordered accordingly. This assessee’s appeal is accepted for statistical purposes in above terms. Order pronounced in Open Court on 22 /06/2021.