DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SIDDHARDHA CONSTRUCTIONS (P) LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

ITA 415/VIZ/2026Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 September 2026AY 2018-1912 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the AO had not properly examined the assessee's reconciliation of the difference, and the CIT(A) had also passed a cryptic order without considering the submissions. Therefore, the matter was set aside and remanded back to the AO for reconsideration.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) added Rs. 11,94,16,685/- to the assessee's income, representing the difference between contract receipts in Form 26AS and the turnover reported in the books. The assessee claimed this difference was due to following the mercantile system of accounting and offering income on accrual basis, with bills submitted in an earlier financial year but payments received later.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made by the AO on account of the difference between Form 26AS and book receipts is justified, and whether the CIT(A) properly considered the assessee's explanation and evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 194C,Section 199

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

Pronounced: 09.09.2026

PER SHRI MANJUNATHA G., ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the Department against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.CIT(A)”], National Faceless

1 Siddhardha Constructions (P) Limited Appeal Centre (“NFAC”) vide DIN: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 194C

All 2,696 judgments and leading authorities on Section 194C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →