JYOTI SHROFF,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 29, , KOLKATA

ITA No.1483/Kol/2025
Assessment Year : 2014-15

P a g e 2 | 3

prevented by sufficient cause in not filing the appeal within time. Accordingly,
I condone the delay of 160 days and admit the appeal for adjudication.
3. At the time of hearing, ld AR submitted that the assessee is an individual and carrying on business of job work of sarees. The appellant had debited the processing charges of Rs.2,95,14,618/- in the profit and loss account, out of the same Rs.2,11,37,746/- was paid to Shri Pradip Das. Shri
Pradip Das has accepted that he has worked under the assessee and taken the amount. The assesse had produced the details of payment and bills and vouchers before the AO but some details were lacking and the AO disallowed the difference of the amount. Ld AR submitted that if the issue is restored to the file of the AO, the assessee will be in a position to produce the balance bills and vouchers, which were not produced at the time of assessment proceedings.
4. In reply, ld Sr DR opposed the prayer of the ld AR of the assessee and submitted that during the remand proceedings also, the assessee could not furnish the same.
5. After hearing the rival submissions and perusing the orders of lower authorities, I find that One Sri Pradip Das was working with the assessee and received the amount. Some of the bills and vouchers were lacking therefore, the AO had disallowed the difference amount. Before the Bench, ld AR submitted that the said bills and vouchers are now available and same can