What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found it appropriate to re-examine the issue afresh by the Assessing Officer, considering both the original and corrected balance sheets. The assessee was directed to appear before the Assessing Officer with necessary details.

The Assessing Officer and CIT(A) added sundry creditors amounting to Rs. 2,12,38,311/-. The assessee claimed that a corrected balance sheet was not considered by the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of sundry creditors was justified without considering the assessee's corrected balance sheet.

Prakashlal Khandelwal, Ranchi vs ITO | s.143(3) | ITAT Ranchi 2020

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI

Before: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

PER BENCH (oral):- This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Ranchi’s order dated 31.08.2018 passed in case No.CIT(A), Ranchi/10410/2016-17 involving proceedings u/s 143(30 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’. Heard Shri Nitin Pasari & Shri Anand Pasari learned authorized representatives for the assessee and Mrs. Nisha Oraon Singhmarr/ JCIT-DR appearing at the Revenue’s behest.

It transpires at the outset during the course of hearing that we need not go much deeper in facts of the instant case. Both the learned lower authorities Prakash Lal Khandelwal Vs. ITO Wd-2(5), Ranchi Page 2 have added sundry credits amounting to Rs.212,38,311/- in the course of assessment proceedings as upheld in the lower appellate proceedings.

The Revenue’s case before us is that since the assessee had sought umpteen opportunities before the Assessing Officer and also did not appear before the CIT(A), the impugned addition has rightly been made going by the original balance-sheet reflecting the amount as Rs.21,23311/- in the balance- sheet as on 31.03.2013 (page 24 of the paper book). Learned counsel’s case on the other hand is that the assessee’s corrected balance-sheet filed before the Assessing Officer has not even been considered in either of the lower proceedings. He invited our attention to page 51 of the paper book not indicating any such sundry creditors in the corrected balance-sheet as on 31.03.2013 to this effect. We therefore deem it appropriate that larger interest of justice would be met in case the Assessing Officer re-examines the entire issue afresh going by the corresponding details in both of the above stated balance-sheets. Learned counsel has undertaken to place on record all necessary details in the consequential proceedings at assessee’s own risk and responsibility. The assessee is therefore directed to appear before the Assessing Officer alongwith a copy of the instant order on or before 21.03.2020. The assessee’s sole substantive grievance canvassed in the instant appeal is accepted for statistical purposes therefore.

3, This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court at the close of hearing on Monday 2nd March, 2020. (लेखा सद य) ("या#यक सद य) (Dr. A.L. Saini) (S.S.Godara) (Accountant Member) (Judicial Member) Ranchi, *Dkp Sr.P.S $दनांकः- 02/03/2020 रांची Prakash Lal Khandelwal Vs. ITO Wd-2(5), Ranchi Page 3

आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant-Prakash Lal Khandelwal, 301, b, Ratnawali Apartment, Circular Road, Lalpur Chowk, Ranchi-834001

""यथ"/Respondent-ITO Ward-2(5), Ranchi 3. संबं/धत आयकर आयु2त रांची / Concerned CIT Ranchi 4. आयकर आयु2त- अपील रांची / CIT (A) Ranchi 5. 5वभागीय "#त#न/ध, आयकर अपील"य अ/धकरण, रांची/ DR, ITAT, Ranchi 6. गाड; फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से, SR.PS, (on Tour), RANCHI //

PRAKASHLAL KHANDELWAL,RANCHI vs. ITO,WARD-2(5), RANCHI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments