Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK
Before: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG & LAXMI PRASAD SAHU
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK
BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No.328/CTK/2017 Assessment Year : 2011-12
M/s. Unideep Food Vs. ACIT, Corporate Circle 1(2), 5th floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Processing (P) Ltd., D-7, Kedar Gouri Apartment, Bhubaneswar. Lewis Road, Bhubaneswar. PAN/GIR No.AAACU 8353 P (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)
Assessee by : Shri S.K.Hota, AR Revenue by : Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Date of Hearing : 13/06/ 2019 Date of Pronouncement : 08/07/ 2019
O R D E R Per C.M.Garg,JM This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of
the CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar dated 22.5.2017 for the assessment
year 2007-08.
The sole grievance of the assessee in this appeal is that the
CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.45,29,020/- under
the head “ unsecured loan”.
This is second round of appeal. In the first round, the
matter was remanded to the file of the Assessing Officer with the
P a g e 1 | 3
ITA No. 328/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 11- 12
direction to make a fresh assessment with the following
directions:
“… Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play we reverse the finding of the CIT(A) and restore this matter to the file of the AO to verify the genuineness of the transaction. The AO is directed to verify whether the assessee has repaid this amount to all the persons stated in his accounts in various years by calling all the creditors. Therefore, the AO is directed to verify and if the assessee has already repaid the amount, it may be deleted as per law after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee.” 4. In pursuance to the direction of the Tribunal, the Assessing
Officer required the assessee to produce all the creditors with
evidence of payment. However, since the assessee failed to
produce the creditors, the Assessing Officer repeated the addition
as was done at the time of original assessment.
The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A).
The CIT(A) also confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer as
the assessee failed to comply with the direction of the Tribunal to
produce all the loan creditors.
Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us.
At the time of hearing, when asked by the Bench, why the
direction of the Tribunal was not complied with by the assessee, ld
A.R. of the assessee did not give any satisfactory reply. We find
that in the first round of proceedings, the Tribunal has directed
P a g e 2 | 3
ITA No. 328/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 11- 12
the assessee to produce all the creditors before the Assessing
Officer to confirm with the evidences that the amount has been
repaid. But, the assessee has failed to produce all the creditors
before the Assessing officer, therefore, the addition was again
confirmed and was upheld by the CIT(A). In view of above facts,
we see no reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) and
dismiss the ground of appeal of the assessee.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced on 08/07/2019.
Sd/- sd/- (Laxmi Prasad Sahu) (Chandra Mohan Garg) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 08/07/209 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : M/s. Unideep Food Processing (P) Ltd., D-7, Kedar Gouri Apartment, Lewis Road, Bhubaneswar
The Respondent. ACIT, Corporate Circle 5th 1(2), floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Bhubaneswar 3. The CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar 4. Pr.CIT- 1, Bhubaneswar 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy// By order
Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack
P a g e 3 | 3