MR.SWARUP DUTTA,HOWRAH vs. I.T.O.,WARD-48(4), KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee's explanation regarding the inclusion of outstanding balances from preceding years in the TDS amount was not rebutted. Therefore, the addition could not be sustained.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a clearing agent, had a difference between the TDS details and his income tax return. The lower authorities added the differential amount of Rs. 19,98,442.76 as undisclosed receipts.
What were the issues?
Whether the difference between TDS details and the income tax return, arising from the inclusion of prior year's outstanding balances, constitutes undisclosed income.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C”, BENCH KOLKATA
O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 1999-00 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (A) - XXXI, Kolkata order dated 30.03.2007 passed in case No.CIT(A)-XXXI/Wd-48(4)/2006-07/43 involving proceedings u/s 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
The assessee’s only grievance raised in the instant appeal challenges the correctness of both the lower authorities’ action making undisclosed receipt income addition of Rs.19,98,442.76/- on account of difference between the corresponding TDS details and his income tax return. Case file suggests that this assessee is a clearing agent running business in the name and style of M/s Dutta Clearing Agency. The details as per TDS certificate stated gross receipts of Rs.1,28,76,711.24 in case of M/s Calcutta Marine Engg. (P) Ltd. and M/s Marshall Corpn. Ltd.; respectively. The assessee’s return admittedly had disclosed income of Rs.1,08,78,262.48/-. Both the learned lower authorities proceeded to add the differential amount of Rs.19,98,442.76 as undisclosed receipts thereof during the assessment as well as in the lower appellate proceedings.
ITA No.2031/Kol/2008 Mr. Swarup Dutta
We have heard rival contentions against and in support of the impugned addition. We find that the assessee’s reply dated 26.12.2006 submitted to the Assessing Officer in furtherance to section 142(1) notice dated 11.09.2006 had explained the difference between the alleged gross receipts as per TDS record and income tax return as under: “It is relevant to income for the year please be apprise that a sum of Rs. 1,08,78,262.48 has been credited to Profit & Loss A/c which is gross value of bills raised towards Material Handling Charges during the year though the amount received from debtors as imparted in our books of accounts is including the balances B/F from preceding years as depicted hereunder: Particulars Op. Bal. As Bill raised TDS Total (2+3- Received Balance as on 01.04.98 during the deducted 4) during the on 31.03.99 year @ 1% year (5-6) Calcutta 3409,519.67 4776,711.24 47,767.00 8138,463.91 8119,000.00 19,463.91 Marine & Engg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. Marshall 385,782.15 4776,711.24 47,767.00 5114,726.39 3081,900.00 2032,826.39 Corp. Ltd. Vishnu 584,220.00 97,500.00 680,745.00 260,000.00 421,720.00 Cotton Mills Others 1227,340.00 1227,340.00 1227,340.00 Total 10878262.48 As revealed in above column we would like to draw your kind attention to the fact that TDS Certificate has been issued by Calcutta Marina & Engg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. in favour of us on payment basis i.e. on Rs. 8100,000/- which is absolutely including our outstanding balance of preceding years which has already been effected in earlier relevant years, statement of debtors for the AY 1998-99 is cited below and copies of A/cs enclosed for your ready reference: Particulars Op. Bal. As Bill raised TDS Total Received Balance as on 01.04.97 during the deducted (2+3-4) during the on 31.03.98 year @ 1% year (5-6) Calcutta 1736,952.90 2351,481.77 23,515.00 4064,919.67 655,400.00 3409,519.67 Marine & Engg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. Marshall 404,979.38 2351,481.77 23,515.00 2732,946.15 2347,164.00 385,782.15 Corp. Ltd. Vishnu 584,220.00 584,220.00 584,220.00 260,000.00 584,220.00 Cotton Mills Srestha 1260,542.44 6,250.00 1254,292.44 743,750.00 510,542.44 Cotton P. Ltd. Total 5287,183.54
ITA No.2031/Kol/2008 Mr. Swarup Dutta
Learned Departmental Representative fails to dispute that neither the Assessing Officer nor the CIT(A) have rebutted the assessee’s clinching plea that the issue in question in respect of above-stated two entities pertains to bill raised during the year and the taxpayer had disclosed his outstanding balances of earlier years as income. We therefore hold that the impugned addition of Rs.19,98,442.76/- cannot be sustained. The same is directed to be deleted. The assessee succeeds in his sole substantive ground.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 30.09.2019.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026