M/S. ARUN EXCELLO REALTY PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

The ld. DR Shri R.V. Aroon Prasad, Addl. CIT submits that the assessee has shown the said credit amount for the last several years and when the Assessing Officer found the same, the assessee admitted that the same will be offered for taxation in the FY 2023-24, had not there been examination by the Assessing Officer, the assessee could not have admitted the same for taxation for FY 2023-24. The ld. DR further submits that the same was raised before the ld. CIT(A) and drew our attention the last para in page 17 of the impugned order. He vehemently argued that the ld. CIT(A) considered the explanation of the assessee and passed well reasoned order. He prayed to confirm the same.

Having heard both the parties, it is noted that all along the assessee has shown the outstanding liability against M/s. SVA Architect and there is no dispute with regard to the same as it is clear from the assessment order, which is reiterated by the ld. AR. In its explanation to the show-cause notice, the assessee explained that it will offer the same in FY 2023-24, but, however, it was not considered by the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A). We find the same contention was raised by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) and it was answered against the assessee as rightly pointed out by the ld. DR. Before us, the assessee filed ledger account copy of the assessee in the books of M/s. SVA Architect, placed at page 6 of the paper book, which clearly shows the opening balance debit of ₹.54,000/- as on 01.04.2021, which was shown credited to the account of the assessee as on 28.02.2022. Therefore, it is clear that no outstanding is against the assessee in the books of account of M/s. SVA Architect as on 31.03.2023. Further, the Profit & Loss account of the assessee as on 31.03.2024 is at page 9 of the paper book, which clearly shows total income at ₹.43,21,000/- including other income. Schedule 20 is at page 18 of the paper book, which contains break-up of other income, wherein, it clearly shows writing off of ₹.44 lakhs as on 31.03.2024. Further, it is noted as on 15.03.2024, the assessee written off ₹.30,70,803/-, which is taken into credit of ₹.54,000/- out of ₹.31,24,803/-. Further, sub-ledger details of total written off as on 31.03.2024 placed at page 23 & 24 of the paper book, which contains ₹.30,70,803.26 as against SVA Architect. Therefore, we find force in the arguments of the ld. AR when the said amount is recognized as income and consequently written off in the books of the assessee, the addition made in the year under consideration is not justified, which amounts to double taxation of the same amount. Thus, the addition made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) is liable to be deleted. But, however, the ledger details of the assessee in the books of SVA Architect, General Ledger Sub-ledger bill details as on 15.03.2024, Profit & Loss account and relevant schedule showing break-up of other income, details of written off as on 31.03.2024, which we have discussed herein above, were not available before the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A), which is clear from the assessment order as well as the impugned order. Therefore, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration to consider the above said details keeping in view of our observations and pass order accordingly. Thus, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 12th November, 2025 at Chennai.