BIOLIFE MEDICAL PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 5(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3646/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 June 2025AY 2017-2018Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA (Accountant Member)5 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that neither the assessee's claim nor the Revenue's contention for a 10% adhoc disallowance could be fully accepted. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to assess the total expenses at 4% for estimation purposes, with a rider that this would not be treated as a precedent.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal arose from an order of the Addl/JCIT(A)-13 dated 18.06.2024 for assessment year 2017-18. The assessee contended that Revised Form 35 was filed in time but not considered, and the AO erred in making an adhoc addition of Rs. 1713608 by disallowing 10% of total expenses without cogent evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred by not considering the Revised Form 35 and dismissing the appeal as infructuous. Whether the AO was justified in making an adhoc addition by disallowing expenses without proper evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 35,Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “A’’ : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH

For Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT(DR)
Hearing: 23.06.2025Pronounced: 27.06.2025

BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Biolife Medical Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, Circle 5(1), A-245, Okhla Industrial Area, CR Building, Phase-I, New Delhi- 20 New Delhi (PAN: AAJCS0030L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Jitender Singh, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 23.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement 27.06.2025 ORDER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP: This appeal by the assessee is emanating from the order of the Addl/JCIT(A)-13, Mumbai dated 18.06.2024 relevant to assessment year 2017- 18.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee, hence, we are proceeding exparte qua the assessee, after hearing the Ld. DR and perusing the records.

3.

It was the contention of the assessee that Revised Form 35 as directed by the Ld. CIT(A) was filed before passing the order and within the extended time sought, but the same was not considered 2 by the CIT(A) and sufficient time was not given to assessee to file the revised Form 35 which is against the principle of natural justice and appeal of the assessee was dismissed as infructuous. It was the further contention that AO has erred in making adhoc addition of Rs. 1713608/- by disallowing 10% of total expenses on Employee Benefit Expenses amounting to Rs. 11251397/-, Power and Fuel Rs. 4837278/- and Repairs and Maintenance Rs. 1047412/- without considering cogent evidences, explanations submitted by the appellant during assessment proceedings, without bring any adverse material on record, on the basis of his own presumptions, surmises, conjectures.

4.

Ld. DR vehemently argues during the course of hearing that AO has rightly added the adhoc disallowance @ 10% of total expenses, which deserve to be upheld.

5.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s contention made in the grounds of appeal

and Revenue’s foregoing vehement contentions. We are of the considered view that neither party’s submissions herein deserve to be accepted in entirety as the assessee on the one hand has not been able to prove his claim nor the department could draw any comparable in the very line of 3 business for estimating the adhoc disallowance @10% of the total expenses. Therefore, we deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to assess the assessee’s foregoing total expenses @4% with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. Accordingly, AO shall finalize its computation in very terms. Ordered accordingly.

6. This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed.

More judgments on Section 35

All 169 judgments and leading authorities on Section 35 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →