BIHAR STATE HYDROELECTRIC POWER CORPORATION LIMITED,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-2 (2), PATNA

PDF

ITA 109/PAT/2023Status: DisposedITAT Patna20 January 2025AY 2012-13Bench: the Ld. AO in justification of this claim. Before the Ld. CIT(A) also, it is mentioned in para 9.2 at page 10, that the assessee did not submit any document or explanation inspite of several opportunities granted. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the impugned addition. 2. Before us, on the last date of hearing, none attended and thereafter the case was taken up for hearing with the help of Ld. DR. The Ld. DR pointed out that in this case, the addition was justified since neither of the 1 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 13,62,00,000/- for expenses belonging to a prior period, noting that no such liability was recorded in the Balance Sheet or Profit & Loss Account for AY 2011-12. The assessee failed to provide cogent explanations or documents to justify the claim before the AO and the CIT(A), leading to the confirmation of the addition.

Held

The Tribunal observed that the assessee suffered due to poor persuasion before the lower authorities. The determination of whether an expense pertains to the current or a prior year should be based on specific narration in the accounts.

Key Issues

Whether the addition made by the AO for expenses belonging to a prior period was justified, considering the lack of explanation and documentation from the assessee.

Sections Cited

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “PATNA BENCH” PATNA

Appearances by: Assessee represented by : None Department represented by : Ashok Kumar, CIT Date of concluding the hearing : 16.01.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 20.01.2025

ORDER PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

In this case, appeal arises from the order dated 20.03.2023, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”).

1.1 In this case, the Ld. AO, vide order dated 31.12.2017, added an amount of Rs. 13,62,00,000/- as expenses belonging to a prior period. The Ld. AO found that in the Balance Sheet and Profit & Loss Account for AY 2011-12, there was no such liability recorded. Admittedly, no cogent Bihar State Hydroelectric Power Corporation Limited explanation was submitted before the Ld. AO in justification of this claim. Before the Ld. CIT(A) also, it is mentioned in para 9.2 at page 10, that the assessee did not submit any document or explanation inspite of several opportunities granted. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the impugned addition.

Before us, on the last date of hearing, none attended and thereafter the case was taken up for hearing with the help of Ld. DR. The Ld. DR pointed out that in this case, the addition was justified since neither of the lower authorities had the benefit of any explanation or documents to enable them to be persuaded in favour of the assessee.

We have carefully considered the submissions of the Ld. DR and also gone through the orders of authorities below. We find that the assessee has suffered on account of poor persuasion before the authorities below. It is also felt that whether an expense pertains to the year under consideration or to an earlier year is to be decided on the basis of specific narration in accounts. Accordingly, we remand this matter back to the file of Ld. AO for examining this issue again, after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee in this regard.