M/S. IMAGES ,MUMBAI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 19(1), MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & MS. RENU JAUHRIAssessment Year: 2013-14
Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:
This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 10.06.2025, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y.
2013-14. M/s. Images
2
2. In this case, the Assessee has raised main ground, which relates to the addition of Rs. 14,20,695/- on account of purchase transaction, as affirmed by the Ld. Commissioner in the impugned order by holding as under: -
“ 6.2 Out of the cases identified by the AO, the appellant has not produced confirmation from M/s Paradise Traders
(purchase of Rs. 45,90,213). However, the appellant has produced copies of invoices issued by the seller totalling to Rs. 31,69,518. Therefore, no proof has been produced for purchases amounting to Rs. 14,20,695. Hence purchase totalling to Rs. 14,20,695 (45,90,213-31,69,518) may be disallowed.
Since appellant has established the genuineness of rest of the purchases, rejection of the books and GP addition may be reversed. Grounds 3 and 4 are partly allowed.
The assessee before this court has claimed that in response to the notice issued on dt. 26.05.2025 by the Ld. Commissioner in the first appellate proceedings, the Assessee vide letter dated 04-06-2025, had duly filed the relevant documents being A-1 a.pdf and A-1 b.pdf supporting the confirmation letter and purchase invoices to the tune of Rs. 45,90,213/- in total, as acknowledged by e-proceedings response acknowledgement no. 106044951040625. However, may be inadvertently or oversight, the Ld. Commissioner failed to take into consideration the same in entirety and somehow made the aforesaid addition of Rs. 14,20,695/-.
The Assessee thus as an abundant caution, also filed a rectification dated 24.06.2025 for rectification of the order dt. M/s. Images
3
10-06-2025 and with regard to the addition as affirmed, which is still pending for adjudication. However, it is a fact that the Assessee by providing the relevant documents has duly substantiated the entire purchase of Rs. 45,90,213/-.
The Ld. DR though refuted the claim of the Assessee but not the factual aspects as demonstrated by the Assessee with the relevant documents.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. As observed above, the assessee has duly filed the relevant documents being attachment No. A-1 a.pdf and A-1 b.pdf on dt. 04.06.2025, as acknowledged, mentioned above. Further, the Assessee also raised grievance by filing a rectification application. The Assessee has also filed relevant invoices before us, as filed before the authorities below. Thus considering the peculiar facts and circumstances in totality and specific to the effect that the invoice/second part of the claim remained to be considered by the Ld. Commissioner, we for just and proper decision of the case and substantial justice, are inclined to remand the instant case to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, on the issue qua addition of Rs. 14,20,695/-, as affirmed by the Ld. Commissioner.
We further observe that the assessee has also raised second ground, which relates to calculating of interest u/s. 234B of the Act. As the same is consequential in nature and, therefore, does not require any independent adjudication. M/s. Images
Thus, the case is accordingly remanded to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, in the context of the addition as affirmed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 02.12.2025. (RENU JAUHRI) (NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
* Kishore, Sr. P.S.
Copy to: The Appellant
The Respondent
The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai
The DR Concerned Bench
////
By Order
Dy/Asstt.