DCIT, DELHI vs. AIR CHARTER SERVICES PVT. LTD., DELHI
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण
िदʟी पीठ “ए”, िदʟी
ŵी िवकास अव̾थी, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं
ŵी अवधेश कुमार िमŵा, लेखाकार सद˟ के समƗ
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH “A”, DELHI
BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER &
SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आअसं.4989/िदʟी/2024(िन.व. 2018-19)
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
E-2, ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extn.
New Delhi 110055
...... अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant
बनाम Vs.
Air Charter Services P. Ltd.,
BMS Complex, 10, Plaza Cinema Building,
Connaught Place, New Delhi 110001
PAN: AADCA-2612-A ..... ᮧितवादी/Respondent
Assessee by : None
Department by : Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT(DR)
सुनवाई कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of hearing
:
24/02/2025
घोषणा कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement :
:
24/02/2025
आदेश/ORDER
PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:
This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-29, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)') dated
22.08.2024, for assessment year 2018-19. 2. The solitary issue raised by the Revenue in appeal is against deleting of disallowance of expenditure u/s. 37 of the Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) to the tune of Rs.2,27,93,362/- by the Act.
3. Shri Javed Akhtar, representing the department submits that the assessee had shown credit outstanding in the name of eight parties aggregating to 2
Rs.2,27,93,362/-. The assessee failed to prove genuineness of the expenditure in assessment proceedings, hence, the Assessing Officer (AO) made addition of the aforesaid amount holding creditors as bogus. In First Appellate proceedings, the CIT(A) deleted the addition without appreciating the fact that the AO had made sufficient enquires before holding creditors as non genuine. The ld. DR prayed for reversing findings of the CIT(A) and upholding the disallowance.
4. We have heard the submissions made by ld. DR and have examined the material available on record, including orders of the authorities below. The assessee is engaged in the business of providing Air Charter Services under ‘non scheduled operator permit’ issued by Director General of Civil Aviation. The service provided by the assessee also includes services of Air Ambulance to patients and Super Specialty Hospitals. During the period relevant to assessment year under appeal, the assessee had shown credit outstanding in the name of eight parties providing aircraft operation services to the assessee including provision of catering, crew, hospitality, etc. The list of parties who provided services to the assessee and against whom the amounts were shown credit outstanding is as under:-
S.No Name of the Creditor
Amount outstanding at the end of the year (in Rs.)
1
Anil Kumar HUF
19,68,106/-
2
Gureen Kaur Sethi
18,33,420/-
3
Jitender Kumar HUF
9,63,812/-
4
Omvir Singh HUF
68,09,905/-
5
SGH Enterprises
19,69,909/-
6
SJH Traders
14,43,673/-
7
Vikas Mahajan HUF
58,36,426/-
8
Vishal Mishra HUF
19,68,426/-
Total
2,27,93,362/-
3
5. During assessment proceedings the AO had issued notice u/s. 133(6) of the Act to these parties. In response to said notice, the said parties had filed confirmations and also stated that services were provided by them. The CIT(A) in the impugned order has recorded a finding of fact that the aforesaid parties had offered receipts from assessee to tax in their respective return of income, TDS was deducted by the assessee on the payments made to the parties. These facts have not been refuted by the Assessing Officer. Further, in response to the show cause notice dated 18.03.2024 the assessee had furnished reconciliation, no adverse findings have been given by the AO on the reconciliation. The nature of business carried out by the assessee is highly specialized and so are the services provided by the aforesaid parties. In given facts of the case, the CIT(A) concluded that genuineness of the services rendered by these parties were proved and the AO could not point out any inconstancy in the bills raised by the parties. Hence, no case of addition on account of bogus credits or disallowance u/s. 37(1) of the Act is made out. The Revenue could not controvert findings of the CIT(A), ergo, impugned order is upheld and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on Monday the 24th day of February,
2025. (AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA)
(VIKAS AWASTHY)
लेखाकार सद᭭य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
᭠याियक सद᭭य/JUDICIAL MEMBER
िदʟी/Delhi, ᳰदनांक/Dated 24/03/2025
NV/-
4
ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषतCopy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथᱮ/The Appellant ,
2. ᮧितवादी/ The Respondent.
3. The PCIT/CIT(A)
4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., िदʟी /DR, ITAT, िदʟी
5. गाडᭅ फाइल/Guard file.
BY ORDER,
////
(Dy./Asstt.