Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2015-16 arose from an order confirming an addition of ₹78,50,084/- made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, treating it as a bogus credit or commission expenditure. The assessment order was ex parte, and the assessee had not appeared before the CIT(A).
Held
The Tribunal held that the documents submitted by the assessee (audited financial statement, bank statements, ledger, invoices, and airway bills) were crucial for adjudication but required factual verification by the AO. Therefore, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the AO for de novo adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the addition made on account of alleged commission expenditure and treated as bogus credit under Section 68 was justified, and whether factual verification by the AO is required for proper adjudication.
Sections Cited
147, 144B, 144, 68, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD & SHRI M. BALAGANESH
O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeal in AY 2015-16, arises out of the order of the ld National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)’, in short] dated 01.01.2025 against the order of assessment passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 28.03.2022 by the Assessing Officer, NFAC, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’).
At the outset, we find that there is a delay in filing of appeal by the assessee for us by 130 days. Considering the reason adduced in the condonation petition, we are convinced that the assessee was prevented from sufficient cause from not filing the appeal in time before us. Hence, in the interest of substantial justice, we are inclined to condone the delay and admit the appeal of the assessee for adjudication.
The only issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld CIT(A) was justified confirming the addition made in the sum of ₹78,50,084/- u/s 68 of the Act in respect of N R Logistics & Traders in the facts and circumstances of the instant case by treating the same as accommodation entry. The interconnected issue involved therein is as to whether the ld CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition made on account of alleged commission expenditure in taking aforesaid alleged accommodation entry.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The assessee company is engaged in the business of international logistic services and filed return of income for AY 2015-16 on 19.09.2015 declaring total income of Rs. 11,10,800/-. The case of the assessee was sought to reopened u/s 147 of the Act on the ground that amount received from NR Logistics & Traders of Rs. 78,50,084/- by the assessee was to be treated as bogus credit u/s 68 of the Act. On perusal of the orders of the lower authorities, we find that the assessment order was framed ex parte u/s 144 of the Act. Before the ld CIT(A), there was no appearance on the part of the assessee, but the ld CIT(A) had sought to adjudicate the issue on merits by reiterating the findings of the ld AO. The assessee had filed the following documents in support of its contentions that the amount received from NR Logistics and Traders could not be treated as bogus credit u/s 68 of the Act:-
a. Copy of audited financial statement as on 31.03.2015 b. Copy of bank statements c. Ledger account of NR Logistics and Traders as appearing in the books of account of the assessee.
In our considered opinion, these documents are crucial for adjudication of the dispute before us but the same requires factual verification by the ld AO. Hence, in the interest of justice and fairplay, we deem it fit and appropriate to restore this appeal to the file of the ld AO for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to mention that the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also given liberty to furnish fresh evidences, if any, in support of its contentions. With these observations, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 11/03/2026.