Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
आयकरअपीलसं./ (िनधाEरणवषE / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/s. Bharath Shipping Agency, ITO C/o. Shri Kuberan & Padma Kuberan, Non Corporate Ward -11(3), बनाम/ Old No.5, New No.9, 1st Cross Street, Chennai. Vs. Lake Area, Nungambakkam Chennai – 600 034. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAIFB-7336-G (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri I. Dinesh (Advocate) – Ld. A.R ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri G. Johnson (Addl.CIT) – Ld DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 28-03-2022 Date of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 28-03-2022 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Chennai [CIT(A)] dated 01-02-2018 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 28-12-2016.
2 - 2. The Ld. AR, at the outset, placed on record additional evidences and pleaded for admission of the same. The additional evidences are accompanied by the affidavit of the assessee wherein it has been submitted that these evidences could not be submitted before the lower authorities in view of the fact that assessee firm was out of business and the business premises was locked by the landlord owing to rental arrears. The Ld. AR submitted that non-production of the documents was neither willful nor wanton. The Ld. Sr. DR, on the other hand, opposed the admission of additional evidences at this stage and submitted that the assessee did not produce them before lower authorities.
The material facts are that in the absence of satisfactory documentary evidences forthcoming from the assessee, certain expenses as claimed by the assessee in the Profit & Loss Account were disallowed on adhoc basis. The depreciation on new assets was also disallowed since the bills were not produced. The assessee was also saddled with disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) on certain payment for want of TDS compliance. During appellate proceedings, similar was the position. Accordingly, the assessment was confirmed against which the assessee is in further appeal before us.
Upon perusal of additional evidences, we are of the considered opinion that the same would have material bearing on the assessment of the assessee. Therefore, keeping in view the principles of natural justice, we admit the same and restore the matter back to the file of Ld. AO for reframing the assessment. The assessee, in turn, is directed to substantiate its case.
3 - 5. The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 28thMarch, 2022.
(MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) उपा45 /VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद= /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे*ई/ Chennai; िदनांक/ Dated : 28-03-2022 EDN/- आदेशकीYितिलिपअ:ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant2. ��यथ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु� (अपील)/CIT(A)4. आयकरआयु�/CIT 5. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR6. गाड�फाईल/GF