What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal decided to remit the issues concerning the non-grant of TDS credit and the assessment tax amount to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination and decision after verification.

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order confirming the addition of bogus purchases and non-grant of TDS credit. The appeal was recalled to adjudicate grounds related to TDS credit and the assessment tax amount.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is entitled to credit for TDS and how the regular assessment tax amount should be computed. The Tribunal found these issues required verification at the Assessing Officer's level.

Rohit Rubber Corp. vs JCIT | ITAT Mumbai 2021

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” Bench, Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri Kanishka Bijlani

For Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan

Hearing: 01.11.2021Pronounced: 03.11.2021

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short learned CIT(A)] dated 14.12.2018 and pertains to assessment year 2009-10. 2. The grounds of appeal read as under :

“l. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) was not justified in treating purchases of Rs.9,47,000/- as bogus purchases and in confirming the order of the assessing officer in adding an amount of Rs. 1,18,375/-, at 12.5% of the alleged bogus purchases as the gross profit on the same.

On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) was not justified in endorsing the Ld. AO's action of not granting credit of tax deducted at source of Rs.5,25,653/-.

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) was not justified in endorsing the Ld. AO's action of taking the regular assessment tax amount at (negative figure) Rs.2,89,214/- in the Income Tax Computation Form accompanying the assessment order.”

At the outset it is noted that this appeal has already been disposed of by this Tribunal vide order dated 20.5.2020. However, subsequently vide Miscellaneous Application No. 291/Mum/2020 vide order dated 31.8.2021

2 Rohit Rubber Corporation appeal was recalled to adjudicate ground No. 2 & 3 which have been remained un-adjudicated in the said ITAT order. Pursuant to the recall, I have heard both the parties and perused the records.

Learned Counsel of the assessee submitted that both the issues raised in ground No. 2&3 may be remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer to examine the issue from record and decide accordingly. Learned Departmental Representative fairly agreed to the above proposition.

Upon careful consideration, I note that in the aforesaid ground No. 2 the assessee is aggrieved by the non-grant of credit of TDS of Rs. 5,25,653/- and in ground No. 3 it is aggrieved by the Assessing Officer’s action of taking the regular assessment tax amount at negative figure of Rs. 2,89,214/- in income tax computation form accompanying the assessment order. It is noted that the said form has not been produced before me. In any case since issues need to be examined at the level of the Assessing Officer, the same may be remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer. Accordingly in the interest of justice both the aforesaid grounds i.e. ground No. 2&3 are remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall decide these issues after actual verification as per law.

In the result, the appeal by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Pronounced in the open court on 3.11.2021.

ROHIT RUBBER CORP.,MUMBAI vs. JT. CIT, RANGE 18(3), MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments