What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to provide the assessee an opportunity to substantiate that the amount in Form 26AS was reconciled in the books of account and offered to tax. The AO is to decide the issue based on facts and law.

The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 6,80,800/- because this amount was reflected in Form 26AS but not credited in the assessee's books. The assessee claimed it was accounted for, but the AO rejected this. The CIT(A) directed the AO to reconcile the difference.

What were the issues?

Whether the Assessing Officer correctly made an addition for an amount reflected in Form 26AS but not explicitly credited in the books, without giving the assessee a proper opportunity to reconcile.

Patna Bakhtiyarpur Tollway Limited vs ITO | ITAT Hyderabad 2022

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad

Before: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Satya Dinakar, CA

For Respondent: Shri B. Yadagiri, DR

Hearing: 11/08/2022Pronounced: 11/08/2022

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2014-15 Patna Bakhtiyarpur Vs. Income Tax Officer Tollway Ltd, Hyderabad Ward 16(2) PAN:AAFCP9577K Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Satya Dinakar, CA Revenue by: Shri B. Yadagiri, DR Date of hearing: 11/08/2022 Date of pronouncement: 11/08/2022 ORDER Per R.K. Panda, A.M This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.12.2017 of the learned CIT (A)-4, Hyderabad relating to A.Y.2014-15.

This appeal was earlier decided by the Tribunal vide order dated 7.9.2021 in 547 & 548/Hyd/2018. Subsequently, vide M.A. Nos 56 & 57/Hyd/2022, order dated 7.6.2022 the Tribunal recalled the order for the A.Y 2014-15 for the limited purpose of adjudicating ground of appeal

No.4 raised by the assessee. Therefore, this order is confined to adjudication of ground of appeal No.4 raised by the assessee which reads as under:

4. The learned CIT (A) ought to have deleted the addition of Rs.6,80,800/- which is duly accounted for in total bill amount of Rs.17,62,67,787/- as against receipt in Form 26AS of Rs.15,25,47,600/-“.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that in the order passed u/s 143(3) dated 22.12.2016, the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs.6,80,800/- on the ground that an amount of Rs.6,80,800/- is reflected as per Form 26AS but not credited in the books of account. The assessee vide letter dated 22.12.2016 mentioned that the receipt to the extent of Rs.6,80,800/- as reflected in 26AS and TDS so credited is accounted for in the books of account. However, the Assessing Officer rejected the claim and made addition of Rs.6,80,800/-to the total income and brought to tax.

In appeal, the learned CIT (A) directed the Assessing Officer to reconcile the difference by giving an opportunity to the assessee.

4.1 According to the learned Counsel for the assessee, the Assessing Officer still today has not followed the direction of the learned CIT(A) by giving an opportunity to the assessee to reconcile the same.

After hearing both the sides and after perusal of the record, we direct the Assessing Officer to give an opportunity to the assessee to substantiate that the amount reflected in Form 26AS has in fact been reconciled in the books of account by offering the same to tax. The Assessing Officer shall decide the issue as per fact and law. We hold and direct accordingly. The ground raised by the assessee is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

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

Order pronounced in the Open Court at the time of hearing.

PATNA BAKHTIYARPUR TOLLWAY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-16(1), HYDERABAD

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