JUBLEE STORES (P) LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 8(4), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 280/KOL/2021Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 June 2022AY 2014-152 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had not provided any findings on the assessee's plea regarding double taxation. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) to verify the plea and adjudicate it with a speaking order.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed an addition of Rs. 8,70,000 made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained sundry debtors. The assessee contended that this income was already accounted for in the profit and loss account, leading to double taxation.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of sundry debtors amounted to double taxation, and whether the CIT(A) had properly adjudicated this issue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B(SMC

Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B(SMC)” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2014-15 Jublee Stores (P) Ltd................................................…..............….……Appellant 35, Park Street, WB-700016.. [PAN: AABCJ9294R] vs. CIT(A)-3, Kolkata....……….…..…....................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: None appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Amitabha Sen, CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : June 27, 2022 Date of pronouncing the order : June 27, 2022

ORDER

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 11.06.2020 of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Kolkata [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). The assessee in this appeal has taken the following grounds of appeal:

1. The Honourable A.O is not justified in adding back Rs.8,70,000/- on the plea that no report has been received from the sundry debtors. Income arising from these debtors has already been considered in the profit and loss account. Adding them back to the total income shall amount to double taxation.

2.

No one has put in appearance on behalf of the assessee despite notice, therefore, we proceed to decide this appeal after hearing the ld. DR and after going through the records.

3.

The Assessing Officer, in this case, has made the addition of Rs.8,70,000/- on account of unexplained sundry debtors. The plea raised by the assessee through the grounds of appeal is that the assessee has already been taken into profit and loss account the aforesaid sundry creditors and booked the same as income of the assessee for the year under consideration. It is pleaded that the Assessing Officer has added back the same

Assessment Year: 2014-15 Jublee Stores (P) Ltd amount which amounts to double addition. The aforesaid facts need to be verified by the concerned income-tax authorities.

4.

We find that this plea has also been raised by the assessee before the CIT(A) but the CIT(A) has not given any findings on this plea raised by the assessee. In view of this, the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to give findings on the above plea of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) either can himself verify the aforesaid plea of the assessee from the records/documents/evidences as may be furnished before him or he may call upon remand report from the Assessing Officer on this issue, then to adjudicate this issue by way of a speaking order.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 27th June, 2022.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →