SITA DEVI MEMORIAL SHIKSHA SANSTHAN,NOIDA (UTTARPRADESH) vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE GZBD, NOIDA(UP)

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1449/DEL/2021Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2022AY 2018-20194 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) rightly deleted the additions made by the AO as the AO accepted the bills and payments during the remand proceedings. The addition on account of Kone Elevator was also directed to be deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed additions to building construction. The AO treated a difference of Rs. 47,54,090/- as unexplained expenditure and further added Rs. 97,60,188/- on account of non-payment to a vendor. The CIT(A) deleted these additions after a remand report.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in deleting additions made by the AO on account of unexplained expenditure and non-payment to vendors for construction expenses.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Saktijit DeyDr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Adv. &
Hearing: 17.03.2022Pronounced: 18.05.2022

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 1449/Del/2021
ITA No. 1810/Del/2021

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member:

1.

The present appeals have been filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue against the orders ld. CIT(A)-4, Kanpur dated 07.09.2021.

2.

In the only tangible ground taken up by the assessee is as under:

“2. The ld. CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the addition of Rs.6,35,022/- made by the AO invoking the & 1810/Del/2021 2 Sita Devi Memorial Shiksha Sansthan provisions of Section 69C of the Act treating the said amount as unexplained expenditu5re under the facts and circumstances of the case.”

3.

In the only ground taken up by the Revenue is as under:

“On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by AO to the tune of Rs.1,45,14,278/- on account of unexplained expenditure as the assessee failed to explain and furnish the required documentary evidences in respect of expenses incurred and the payments made towards construction during the course of assessment proceedings. The additional evidences produced by the assessee cannot be allowed, if they were not produced during the assessment proceedings.”

4.

During the year, the assessee has shown additions to the building construction of Rs.3.63 crores. The assessee was asked by the AO to furnish the source of investment in the construction of the building. The assessee submitted that an amount of Rs.1 crore has been received as corpus donation from one entity namely M/s Nalanda Education Society. The AO held that on verification the assessee could submit the details of vendors amounting to Rs.3.16 crores instead of Rs.3.63 crores incurred by the assessee. The difference of amount of Rs.47,54,090/- is treated as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Assessing Officer.

5.

Further, the AO held that out of the list of vendors containing Rs.3.16 crores of expenditure, an amount of Rs.1,07,40,188/- pertaining to two bills dated 05.06.2017, 10.05.2017 of the entity namely M/s Metamarphosis Construction, only an amount of Rs.9,80,000/- has been made & 1810/Del/2021 3 Sita Devi Memorial Shiksha Sansthan on 26.04.2017. Since, no amounts have been paid to M/s Metamarphosis Construction, the remaining amount of Rs.97,60,188/- was also treated as unexplained and added to the total income of the assessee.

6.

Aggrieved the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A).

7.

Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted copies of the ledger account highlighting the said construction expenses along with details of payment thereof and copies of invoices. The ld. CIT(A) obtained the remand report from the AO on the details submitted by the assessee. The AO accepted all the bills amounting to Rs.3.63 crores. The ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs.46,54,090/- based on the remand report. Hence, we hereby affirm the order of the ld. CIT(A) on this ground.

8.

With regard to amount of Rs.97,60,188/-, the AO vide report dated 09.03.2021 submitted that facts were verified and found that there was a debit balance of Rs.1,05,79,498/- as on 01.04.2017 in the ledger account of M/s Metamarphosis Construction and there was a further payment of Rs.9,80,000/- was made during the year and the invoices issued by the contractor were adjusted against the outstanding advances. Since, the matter has been accepted by the AO during the remand report. The ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition made by the AO which we affirm.

9.

With regard to addition of Rs.6,35,022/- on account of bill in the name of Kone Elevator India Pvt. Ltd. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition owing to non-submission of bill. It was submitted that there was opening balance of Rs.5,89,000/- and & 1810/Del/2021 4 Sita Devi Memorial Shiksha Sansthan a debit entry of Rs.11,64,800/-. The closing balance was Rs.81,104/-. The payment during the year were to the tune of Rs.11,64,800/- made on 28.08.2017. There was no amount paid as alleged by the Assessing Officer at para 4.3. Hence, the addition made by the AO is directed to be deleted.

10.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 18/05/2022.

More judgments on Section 69C

All 8,217 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →