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

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1483/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 September 2025AY 2014-2015Bench: 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, Id Sr DR opposed the prayer of the Id AR of the assessee and submitted that during the remand proceedings also, the assessee could not furnish the same.1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. The Learned AR submitted that the missing bills and vouchers are now available and can be produced if the issue is restored to the AO for reassessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee debited processing charges of Rs. 2,95,14,618/- in its P&L account, of which Rs. 2,11,37,746/- was paid to Shri Pradip Das for job work. The AO disallowed the difference due to lacking bills and vouchers.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance of processing charges was justified when the assessee claims to now have the missing bills and vouchers for production.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Assessment Year : 2014-15 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

P a g e 2 | 3

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →