WILLARD INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 3(3), BULANDSHAHR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 178/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 July 2018AY 2013-147 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to provide evidence to explain the additions, both for unexplained interest income and the loan. The assessee had also surrendered the loan amount at the assessment stage, making an appeal on that ground untenable.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) in limine for being filed manually instead of electronically. The CIT(A) also passed a separate order on merits, dismissing the appeal against additions made by the AO for unexplained interest income and an unexplained loan.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal in limine for manual filing and whether the additions for unexplained interest and loan were correctly upheld on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES “SMC” : DELHI

Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI

Hearing: 11.07.2018Pronounced: 11.07.2018

Date of Hearing : 11.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 11.07.2018 ORDER

This appeal by assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A), Aligadh, Dated 14.09.2017, for the A.Y. 2013-2014.

2.

In this case return of income was filed declaring loss of Rs.(-)3,27,039/-. The A.O. passed the assessment order under section 143(3) dated 22.03.2016 computing total income of Rs.13,94,545/- after making four additions on merit. The 2 ITA.No.178/Del./2018 M/s. Willard India Ltd., New Delhi.

assessee filed the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) in manual form on 19.04.2016. The Ld. CIT(A) noted that as per Board Circular and provisions of Rule 45, the appeal should have been filed electronically. The assessee was required to show cause why the appeal being non-est should not be dismissed. The Ld. CIT(A) accordingly dismissed the appeal of assessee in limine vide order dated 14.09.2017.

3.

The assessee in the present appeal challenged the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in upholding the addition of Rs.2,97,219/- and addition of Rs.9,20,000/-. The record reveals that the Ld. CIT(A) also passed another order on the same date i.e., 14.09.2017 deciding the appeal of the assessee on merits considering the above grounds on merits. It, therefore, appears that assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal against the second order of the Ld. CIT(A) in dismissing the appeal of the assessee on merits.

4.

It may be noted that as regards addition of Rs.2,97,219/-, the A.O. on verification of 26AS noted that 3 ITA.No.178/Del./2018 M/s. Willard India Ltd., New Delhi. assessee-company has not disclosed FDR's interest income of Rs, 5,93,760/-. The assessee-company explained before the A.O. that it has already shown interest income of Rs 2,96,541/- earned from FDR's of State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur. It would, therefore, confirm that balance amount of Rs.2,97,219/- remain unexplained. The A.O. accordingly, made the addition of the aforesaid amount.

5.

The A.O. further found that assessee has raised loans during assessment year under appeal. Assessee was asked to furnish confirmation of the loan/source and copy of the bank account and assessment details of the lender to prove the creditworthiness of the lender. In respect of the loan of Rs.9,20,000/- received from Shri Mohit Bajoria, the assessee has not furnished source, copy of bank account and assessment details. The assessee has not proved the creditworthiness of the lender. A show cause notice was issued to the assessee, but no details have been furnished before A.O.

The Counsel for the assessee, on the next date of 4 ITA.No.178/Del./2018 M/s. Willard India Ltd., New Delhi. hearing surrendered the amount and agreed for addition of Rs.9,20,000/-. The A.O. accordingly made addition of Rs.9,20,000/- under section 68 of the I.T.

Act, 1961. The Ld. CIT(A) noted that assessee has not been able to furnish any evidence to explain both the additions. Accordingly, both the grounds were dismissed.

6.

I have heard the Learned Representatives of both the parties. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that assessee had approached at very short notice and not provided any record or documents, so, she is not in a position to pursue the case. Endorsement to the same effect is also made in the appeal paper.

7.

On the other hand, the Ld. D.R. relied upon the orders of the authorities below.

8.

After considering the facts of the case in the light of submissions of the parties, it is clear that assessee has no case for interference. Admittedly, the assessee has not 5 ITA.No.178/Del./2018 M/s. Willard India Ltd., New Delhi.

shown the entire interest for taxation, therefore, the balance interest of Rs.2,97,219/- remain unexplained.

Further, as regards loan of Rs.9,20,000/- received from Shri Mohit Bajoria, assessee failed to prove conditions of Section 68 of the I.T. Act. At the assessment stage, Learned Counsel for the Assessee, surrendered and agreed for the amount of the loan so received. It is well settled Law that when assessee agreed for the addition, no appeal lies to the appellate authorities. It is, therefore, clear that assessee failed to provide any evidence before the authorities below to explain both the above additions on merit. The Ld. CIT(A) in the absence of any documents on record, correctly dismissed the appeal of assessee on both these additions.

During the course of arguments of appeal also, Learned Counsel for the Assessee has submitted that assessee is not providing any documents to them and they are in a position to pursue the case. In view of the above facts and 6 ITA.No.178/Del./2018 M/s. Willard India Ltd., New Delhi. circumstances noted above and in the absence of any evidence on record, no interference is called for in the orders of the authorities below. We, accordingly, confirm the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in dismissing the appeal of assessee. Appeal of assessee has no merit and is accordingly dismissed.

9.

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →