DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1), MYSORE vs. M/S TRAVEL PARKZ, MYSORE

The appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 28.02.2018 passed by learned CIT(A), Mysore and it relates to the assessment year 2012-2013. The Revenue is aggrieved by the decision of the learned CIT(A) in setting aside the addition made under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act to the file of the Assessing Officer in violation of the provisions of section 251(1)(a) of the Act.

We have heard the parties and perused the record. The assessee is a travel agent engaged in the business of arranging vehicles for customers, booking of air / railway / bus tickets and such other allied business activities. During the course of assessment proceedings, the A.O. asked the . M/s.Travel Parkz. assessee to furnish the details of tax deducted at source from the payments made to vehicle owners. The Assessing Officer, by making certain computation, disallowed a sum of Rs.201.80 lakh u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The learned CIT(A), however, restored the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to examine the issue afresh after taking into consideration the reconciliation statement submitted by the assessee. The Revenue’s case is that the learned CIT(A) does not have power to restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer as the provisions of section 251(1)(a) of the Act.

The learned Departmental Representative submitted that the order passed by the learned CIT(A) suffers from illegality as the same is in violation of the provisions of section 251(1)(a) of the Act.

The learned AR, however, submitted that the grounds urged by the Revenue would become infructuous, as the Assessing Officer, in the restored proceedings, has already deleted the impugned disallowance after considering the reconciliation statement furnished by the assessee.

Admittedly, the provisions of section 251(1)(a) of the Act do not authorize the learned CIT(A) to set aside the matters to the file of the Assessing Officer. Hence the order passed by Ld CIT(A) is violation of the above said provisions and the same is set aside. However, we noticed that the assessee has filed a reconciliation statement for the first time before the learned CIT(A) and hence, the same requires examination at the end of . M/s.Travel Parkz. the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, we are of the view that this issue should be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for examining it afresh after considering the reconciliation statement submitted by the assessee. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the learned CIT(A) and restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for examining it afresh.

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