ADITYA ANTIBIOTICS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] - 1, New Delhi dated 17.03.2017 pertaining to Assessment Year 2012-13.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite service of notice. We decided to proceed exparte.

The ld. DR was heard at length. Case records carefully perused.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that during the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that there was no business activity in the previous year, though some investments have been made in immovable properties. The assessee was asked to give source of investment in the properties. The assessee filed necessary evidences/confirmations of source of investment and on perusal of the same, the Assessing Officer noticed that there was a list of advances received back. The Assessing Officer found that there were no confirmations or ledger accounts of these parties. To verify the transactions, the Assessing Officer issued notices u/s 133(6) of the Act.

On receiving no plausible reply, the Assessing Officer asked the assessee to give confirmed copy of ledger accounts of these companies.

In its reply, the assessee stated that it was not aware of the present address of the companies and it is not in contact with the directors of the companies.

The Assessing Officer did not find the reply of the assessee convincing and, accordingly, made addition of Rs. 1.18 crores.

The assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A) but without any success.

The assessee filed some documents before the ld. CIT(A) in support of its claim of advances received back from several parties.

The ld. CIT(A), drawing support from the observations of the Assessing Officer, confirmed the additions.

Having heard the ld. DR at length, we find that during the appellate proceedings, the assessee did file certain documents on which the ld. CIT(A) called for a remand report. The Assessing Officer, in his remand report, stated that since sufficient opportunities were given to the assessee at the time of assessment proceedings and he chose not to reply/comply, therefore, these documents should not be admitted at this stage. We are of the considered opinion that even if the assessee did not comply with the queries during the assessment proceedings, but he did file supporting evidences at the time of appellate proceedings. Therefore, the Assessing Officer should have examined those documents in the remand proceedings.

In the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it fit to restore the issues to the file of the Assessing Officer. The assessee is directed to file all documentary evidences in support of its claim of advance money received back alongwith confirmations and supporting bank documents and the Assessing Officer is directed to examine the same and decide the issue afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

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