VIDYA SHREE BUILDCON PVT LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 26(2), NEW DELHI
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’, NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI G.S. PANNU & SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’, NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No. 1489/Del/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15
Vidya Shree Buildcon Pvt. Vs. ACIT, Circle 26(2), Ltd., H.No. 195, 2nd Floor, New Delhi Back side Ram Vihar, Delhi-1100 92
PAN :AADCV3389H (Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by N o n e Respondent by Shri T. Kipgen, CIT, DR
Date of hearing 23.03.2022 Date of pronouncement 31.03.2022
ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY: JUDICIAL MEMBER This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated
21.12.2018 of learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-9,
New Delhi for the assessment year 2014-15.
Before we proceed to decide the appeal, it is necessary to
observe, when the appeal was called for hearing, none appeared on
behalf of the assessee.
2 ITA No.1489/Del/2019
On perusal of record, it is noticed, when the appeal was listed for
hearing on 18.01.2022, no one had appeared on behalf of the assessee.
The record further reveals that the hearing notice issued to the
assessee through post in the address mentioned in the appeal memo
could not be served on the assessee despite two attempts being made
by the postal authorities. Therefore, the notice was returned back un-
served with the postal remark “Left”.
The aforesaid facts clearly reveal lack of interest of the assessee
in pursuing the present appeal. That being the case, we are of the view
that no useful purpose will be served in keeping the appeal pending
any further. Therefore, the appeal is heard ex parte qua the assessee
with the assistance of learned Departmental Representative and based
on facts and material available on record.
The dispute in the present appeal is confined to addition of
Rs.2.2 crores made under Section 68 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961.
Briefly, the facts are, assessee is a resident company. For the
assessment year under dispute, assessee filed its return of income on
31.03.2015, declaring total income of Rs.55,15,440. In course of
assessment proceedings, while verifying the audited balance sheet,
3 ITA No.1489/Del/2019
assessing officer noticed substantial increase in unsecured loans
during the year. Thus, he called upon the assessee to file the details of
unsecured loan and also furnish supporting evidence to prove the
genuineness of such loan transactions. After verifying the details
furnished by the assessee, he found that the assessee has not furnished
the address of the persons from whom loan was taken. As alleged by
the assessing officer, though, the assessee was asked to prove the
identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the creditors, however,
the assessee did not file any supporting evidence despite several
opportunities being granted. Since, the assessee failed to furnish
satisfactory explanation and evidence in response to the query raised
by the assessing officer, he proceeded to treat the entire loan amount
of Rs.2,25,00,000 as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the
Act and added back to the income of the assessee. Though, assessee
contested the aforesaid addition before learned Commissioner of
Income-Tax (Appeals), however, he sustained the addition made by
the assessing officer.
We have heard the learned Departmental Representative and
perused the material on record.
4 ITA No.1489/Del/2019
Undisputedly, assessee is aggrieved with the addition made of
Rs.2.22 crores under Section 68 of the Act. As observed earlier, in
course of assessment proceedings, assessee did not furnish any
supporting evidence to establish the identity and creditworthiness of
the parties from whom loan was availed. The assessee also failed to
prove the genuineness of the transaction. Thus, none of the ingredients
of section 68 of the Act could be satisfactorily established by the
assessee. Before the learned First Appellate Authority, assessee
furnished certain additional evidences and sought admission of them
under Rule 46A.
On a perusal of the order of learned Commissioner (Appeals), it
is evident, the additional evidences sought to be furnished by the
assessee are mostly its own documents and must be internally
available with the assessee. The assessee has not furnished any
satisfactory explanation why such documents could not be furnished
in course of assessment proceedings. As rightly observed by learned
Commissioner (Appeals), assessee cannot adduce any additional
evidence as a matter of right. The assessee has to explain satisfactorily
why such evidence could not be furnished in the earlier proceedings.
5 ITA No.1489/Del/2019
In the facts of the present appeal, assessee has failed to furnish any
such cogent explanation. Therefore, learned Commissioner (Appeals)
was justified in rejecting the additional evidences. As regards the
merits of the issue, the material available on record clearly reveal that
the assessee did not furnish any evidence which can either prove the
identity and creditworthiness of the creditors or the genuineness of the
loan transaction. That being the factual position emerging from record,
no relief can be granted to the assessee. Thus, we do not find any valid
reason to interfere with the decision of learned Commissioner
(Appeals) on the issue. Grounds are dismissed.
In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 31st March, 2022
Sd/- Sd/- ( G.S. PANNU ) (SAKTIJIT DEY) PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 31st March, 2022. Mohan Lal Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi
6 ITA No.1489/Del/2019
Sl. No. Particulars Date 1. Date of dictation (Order drafted through Dragon software): 23.03.2022 2. Date on which the draft of order is placed before the Dictating Member: 3. Date on which the draft of order is placed before the 23.03.2022 other Member: 4. Date on which the approved draft of order comes to 23.03.2022 the Sr. PS/PS: 5. Date of which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement: 6. Date on which the final order received after having 31.03.2022 been singed/pronounced by the Members: 7. Date on which the final order is uploaded on the website of ITAT: 8. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 31.03.2022 9. Date on which files goes to the Head Clerk: 10. Date on which file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order: 11. Date of dispatch of order:
