CGU LOGISTICS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 5(1)(2), MUMBAI

The dispute in the present appeal is confined to the addition of ` 10,60,01,838, on account of discrepancy between the income shown by the assessee and as appearing in Form no.26AS.

Brief facts are, the assessee company filed its return of income for the impugned assessment year on 23rd November 2013, declaring loss of ` 34,31,31,098. In the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer on the basis of information contained in annual information report (AIR) found that as per Form no.26AS uploaded to the system, income received by the assessee during the relevant year was ` 13,62,41,552. Whereas, in the Profit & Loss Account the assessee had credited income of ` 2,87,33,325. Therefore, the Assessing Officer called upon the assessee to explain the difference in income. In response, it was submitted by the assessee that the income shown in Form no.26AS, is incorrect and erroneous. However, the Assessing Officer disbelieving the claim of the assessee added back the differential amount of ` 10,75,08,227, at the hands of the assessee and after adjusting the loss shown, he determined the income of the assessee at ` 1,31,77,350. The assessee challenged the aforesaid addition before learned Commissioner (Appeals). From the material submitted before the learned Commissioner (Appeals), he found that the difference in income as shown by the assessee and as appearing in Form no.26AS is due to the following income:–

Learned Commissioner (Appeals) after considering the submissions made by the assessee in the context of facts and material on record including the original 26AS, found that the interest income of ` 15,06,390, was already offered for taxation in the Profit & Loss Account itself as business income. Therefore, he observed that the interest income cannot be again added under the head income from other sources. However, he observed that while adopting the receipts as per 26AS, which includes the interest income of ` 15,06,390, the Assessing Officer made an error by reducing the interest income from the receipts shown by the assessee in the Profit & Loss Account. Therefore, after considering the facts and material on record, including original 26AS, learned Commissioner (Appeals) computed the addition to be made by the Assessing Officer on account of difference of receipt as per Profit & Loss Account and Form no.26AS, as under:–

Learned Authorised Representative submitted, the assessee has no dispute with regard to the interest income of ` 15,06,390. Further, he submitted, on instructions of the assessee, he does not want to 4 CGU Logistics Ltd. contest the addition of ` 1,06,63,181, being the contract amount received from Prime Minerals. Therefore, the only addition which survives for our consideration is the amount of ` 12,40,71,982, being contract receipts from Sociedade. The learned Authorised Representative submitted, the said party has wrongly shown the receipt of ` 12,40,71,982 to the assessee which was uploaded in the old 26AS. He submitted, subsequently, the mistake was rectified by Sociadade showing the actual amount paid to the assessee at ` 5,67,13,320, and in new Form no.26AS uploaded to the system. In this context, he drew our attention to the contract amount paid by the said party to the assessee as shown in old and new Form no.26AS. The learned Authorised Representative submitted, though the new Form no.26AS was furnished before the learned Commissioner (Appeals), he has completely ignored the payment shown in the revised/new form no.26AS. Thus, he submitted, the amount of addition on account of contract receipts from Sociedade should be restricted to ` 5,67,13,320.

We have considered rival submissions and perused material on record. No doubt, in the old Form no.26AS the contract receipt from Sociedade has been shown at ` 12,40,71,982. However, in the revised/new Form no.26AS, relating to financial year 2012–13, the receipt from Sociedade has been shown at ` 5,67,13,320. Thus, prima–facie, the claim of the assessee that the actual amount received from Sociedade during the year under consideration is ` 5,67,13,320, appears to be correct. Therefore, we direct the Assessing Officer to verify the receipt in the new Form no.26AS issued for the financial year 2012–13, a copy of which has been submitted before us, and restrict the addition on account of contract receipt from Sociedade to the amount shown in new Form no.26AS. Grounds raised are partly allowed.

In the result, appeal is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 15.04.2019