MEDISYS UNIVERSAL PVT. LTD.,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, PANCHKULA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH PHYSICAL HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM 1. आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.479/CHANDI/2023 (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2017-18) ACIT- Panchkula M/s Medisys Universal Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Department Plot No.97, Industrial Area-1 बनाम/ Vs. Bays No.41-43, Aaykar Bhawan Sector-15, Panchkula-134113 Sector-2, Panchkula-134112 �ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAJCM-9277-F (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.439/CHANDI/2023 (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/s Medisys Universal Pvt. Ltd. ACIT - Panchkula Plot No.97, Industrial Area-1 Income Tax Department बनाम/ Vs. Sector-15, Panchkula-134113 Bays No.41-43, Aaykar Bhawan Sector-2, Panchkula-134112 �ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAJCM-9277-F (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) & Ms. Shruti Khandelwal (Advocate) – Ld. ARs : ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) - Ld. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 20-04-2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 28-04-2026 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid cross-appeals for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax

(Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)] dated 02-06-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. AO u/s 143(3) of the Act on 03-12-2019 making various additions in the hands of the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) partially allowed the appeal of the assessee which has led to present cross-appeals before us. 2. The Ld. AR advanced argument to support the case of the assessee and referred to various documents as placed in the paper book. The Ld. Sr. DR also advanced arguments supporting the assessment as framed by Ld. AO. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, the appeals are disposed-off as under. The assessee being resident corporate assessee is stated to be engaged in providing health supplements on commission basis through e-commerce. The substantive issues that have been urged in assessee’s appeals are – (i) disallowance of rent expenses for Rs.2,55,914/-; (ii) Additions u/s 68 for Rs.12,59,248/-; (iii) Addition of unexplained loans for Rs.29,95,000/-. The issues that arises in revenue’s appeals are – (i) Addition of unexplained creditors u/s 68 for Rs.2,27,48,198/- pertaining to M/s Geeta Enterprises; (ii) Addition of unexplained creditors u/s 68 for Rs.63,08,614/- pertaining to M/s Ganesh Medical Store. These issues are adjudicated as under. 3. Disallowance of Rent Expenses The assessee claimed rent expenses for Rs.10,27,490/-. However, as per rent deed, the rent payable was Rs.7,71,576/-. The assessee stated that there was amendment in the rent agreement wherein through mutual agreement, the office rent of basement was increased from

Rs.37,000/- to Rs.50,000/- per month. In support, the assessee furnished amendment clause as signed by the owner of the property. However, the differential of Rs.2,55,914/- was denied by Ld. AO on the ground there was no amendment deed or fresh deed and the amendment was not on stamp paper. The Ld. CIT(A) endorsed the addition as made by Ld. AO against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4. Unexplained Sundry Creditors 4.1 The assessee reflected sundry creditors as under: - No. Name Amount (Rs.) 1. M/s Delhivery Couriers (SSN Logistics Pvt. Ltd.) 12,59,248/- 2. M/s Ganesh Medical Store 63,08,614/- 3. M/s Geeta Enterprises 2,27,48,198/- Total 3,03,16,060/- The assessee was accordingly required to demonstrate the fulfillment of ingredients of Sec.68. 4.2 For M/s Geeta Enterprises, the assessee furnished GST Number, PAN etc. The Ld. AO observed that the PAN belonged to Shri Ganeshi Lal. However, as per confirmation, the proprietor was shown as Shri Om Parkash Latka. The address of this entity was exactly the same as the address of M/s Ganesh Medical Store. However, Ld. CIT(A) deleted this addition on the ground that as per PAN details, Shri Ganeshi Lal was father of Shri Om Parkash Latka. Further, there was no restriction for parties to operate from same address. Aggrieved, the revenue is in further appeal before us. 4.3 For M/s Ganesh Medical Store, the assessee furnished GST Number and confirmation. However, the address of the creditor was

different than as mentioned in the confirmation. Therefore, Ld. AO disallowed the same. However, Ld. CIT(A) deleted the same on the ground that no enquiry was made by Ld. AO at the given address. Mere mismatch in the address could not be a ground to make the impugned addition. Aggrieved, the revenue is in further appeal before us. 4.4 For M/s Delhivery Couriers, the assessee only furnished a ledger account. On these facts, this creditor was added by Ld. AO as unexplained cash credit u/s 68. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. 5. Unsecured Loan from M/s Medisys Biotech Pvt. Ltd. (MBPL) 5.1 The assessee obtained loan of Rs.29.95 Lacs from this entity. To support the same, the assessee furnished audit report, financial statements and Income Tax Return (ITR) of that entity. However, Ld. AO did not accept the same on the ground that no loan to the assessee was appearing in the financial statement of that entity. 5.2 During first appeal, the assessee contended that MBPL was an associated entity. M/s Geeta Enterprises and M/s Ganesh Medical Store made purchases from MBPL and used the digital online marketing platform of the assessee to sell the products. The assessee charged commission for these services. The amount received from online sales was collected in the books of the assessee and credit was given to M/s Geeta Enterprises and M/s Ganesh Medical Store. These two entities were ‘Accounts Payable’ for the assessee but ‘Accounts Receivable’ for MBPL. Thus, as such there was no loan from MBPL.

However, Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. Our findings and Adjudication 6. So far as the disallowance of rent expenses is concerned, it could be seen that the differential rent has been disallowed merely on the ground that the amendment in rent clause was not on stamp paper or notarized. However, this fact alone, at the most, would make the document deficient but could not jeopardize the claim of the assessee that it has paid rent as per contractual terms to the owner of the property. The confirmation of the owner has already been furnished. The payment to the owner is through banking channels. There is no enquiry from the owner of the property. Therefore, this addition could not be sustained. We order so. 7. So far as addition qua M/s Geeta Enterprises is concerned, the assessee has furnished the requisite details along with confirmation. The finding of Ld. AO qua PAN was found to be erroneous by Ld. CIT(A). As rightly held by Ld. CIT(A), there was no restriction for parties to operate from same address. Therefore, this addition has rightly been deleted. Similar documents have been furnished by the assessee for M/s Ganesh Medical Store. The claim has been denied merely on difference in address. However, there is no independent enquiry by Ld. AO from loan creditors at the given addresses. Mere mismatch in the address could not be a ground to make the impugned addition. Therefore, we endorse the findings of Ld. CIT(A) for these two creditors. The revenue’s appeal stands dismissed.

Sd/- sd/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 28-04-2026 आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITAT CHANDIGARH