BALWANT RAI HUF,MANDI DABWALI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SIRSA
1
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH
PHYSICAL HEARING
BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM
AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.101/CHANDI/2025
(िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2022-23)
M/s Balwant Rai HUF
C-21 Old Grain Market
Mandi Dabwali 125104 (Hr)
बनाम/ Vs.
ITO
Ward -1
Haryana – 125 055
̾थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.AAIHB-4472-M
(अपीलाथŎ/Appellant)
:
(ŮȑथŎ / Respondent)
अपीलाथŎकीओरसे/ Appellant by :
Shri A.K. Jindal (Advocate) – Ld. AR
ŮȑथŎकीओरसे/Respondent by :
Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing
:
04-06-2025
घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement
:
09-06-2025
आदेश / O R D E R
Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2022-23 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Central (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 26-11-2024 in the matter of an intimation issued by CPC u/s 143(1) on 27-04-2023 denying TDS credit invoking Rule 37BA. The Ld. CIT(A) rendered a finding that the transactions as undertaken by the assessee was in the nature of trade and not in the nature of 2
commission agent / broker and accordingly, the impugned adjustment was held to be in order. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.
2. The Ld. AR, drawing attention to CBDT circular No. 452 dated 17-
03-1986 and Instruction No. 03/2013, contended that the assessee acted as a kaccha arhtiya and it was required to consider the commission income only in its financial statements. The Ld. AR also referred to Form 26AS and sample copy of Form J & I and ledger extracts to support these submissions. The Ld. Sr. DR supported the orders of lower authorities.
3. We find that the assessee’s aforesaid submissions have not been considered in correct perspective by first appellate authority. The only grievance of the assessee is grant of TDS credit. Considering the facts of the case, we deem it fit to grant the assessee another opportunity of hearing before Ld. CIT(A) to plead and prove its case. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to Ld.
CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after considering various documents of the assessee with a direction to the assessee to substantiate its case.
4. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 09-06-2025. (LALIET KUMAR) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated: 09-06-2025. 3
आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant
2. ŮȑथŎ/Respondent
3. आयकरआयुƅ/CIT
4. िवभागीयŮितिनिध/DR
5. गाडŊफाईल/GF