KUNNATHAN CHIP BOARDS PRIVATE LTD,MUVATTUPUZHA vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD-1(4), KOCHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 823/COCH/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 May 2025AY 2017-18Bench: the CIT(A), the learned Counsel for the assessee argued that no addition can be made u/s.69C of the Act on estimation basis, however, the CIT(A) could not find any force in the arguments of the assessee and affirmed the order of the AO.3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the AO failed to judiciously consider the documentary evidence. Thus, the matter was remitted back to the file of the AO for fresh examination, with directions to provide the assessee a meaningful opportunity of being heard before passing any order.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2017-18, which affirmed the AO's addition of Rs. 1,30,22,240 under Section 69C on an estimation basis. The assessee had contended before the CIT(A) that no addition could be made under Section 69C on estimation.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made by the AO under Section 69C, based on estimation and without judicious consideration of documentary evidence, was legally sustainable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

Pronounced: 30.05.2025

Asst.Year 2017-2018 Kunnathan Chip Boards The Income Tax Officer Private Limited v. Corporate Ward 1(4) iII/95-B, Ozhukupara Kochi. Nirapu, East Vazhappally PO Muvattupuzha Ernakulam – 686 673. PAN : AAECK7207J. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.Arun Raj S, Advocate Respondent by : Smt.Leena Lal, Sr.AR Date of Pronouncement : 30.05.2025 Date of Hearing : 27.05.2025. O R D E R

Per Prakash Chand Yadav, JM :

1.

The present appeal of the assessee is arising from the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre / learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short] dated 23.07.2024, having DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1066908354(1) and relates to the assessment year 2017- 2018.

2.

At the outset, we find that the Assessing Officer has invoked the provisions of sec.69C for making addition of Rs.1,30,22,240 on estimation basis. Before the CIT(A), the learned Counsel for the assessee argued t hat no addition can . Kunnathan Chip Boards Private Limited. be made u/s.69C of the Act on estimation basis, however, the CIT(A) could not find any force in the arguments of the assessee and affirmed the order of the AO.

3.

Aggrieved with the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has come up in appeal before us. The learned Counsel for the assessee reiterated the arguments made before the AO.

4.

The learned DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below.

5.

After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that the AO has failed to consider the documentary evidences filed before the AO in a judicious manner. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we remit this matte to the file of the AO for examining afresh. Needless to say, the AO shall afford meaningful opportunity of being heard to the assessee, before passing any order.

6.

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

Order pronounced on this 30th day of May, 2025.

More judgments on Section 69C

All 8,217 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →