KIRATPUR NER CHOWK EXPRESSWAY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-14(2)(1), MUMBAI

Coming to ITA No.2993/M/2024, we observe that the Assessee had declared its total income at “Rs.Nil” by filing its return of income for the A.Y. 2015-16 on 30.09.2015, which was subsequently selected for complete scrutiny and consequently statutory notices were issued to the Assessee calling for details, in response to which the Assessee filed the relevant details. On perusing the details filed by the Assessee, the Assessing Officer (AO) observed that the Assessee company is engaged in the business of road construction, operation and maintenance and during the year under consideration has earned interest of Rs.1,33,61,068/- on fixed deposit and capitalized the same by treating it as business income and adjusted against the expenses incurred. Though the case of the Assessee was referred to transfer pricing, however, vide order dated 23.10.2018 u/s 92CA(3) of the Act the value of Assessee’s specified domestic transaction qua arms length price was not disturbed. Accordingly, the AO completed the scrutiny assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s.92CA(3) of the Act vide order dated 21.12.2018, whereby the total income of the Assessee as per MAT u/s 115JB of the Act to the tune of Rs.(-) 99,77,941/- adding the interest income of Rs.1,33,61,068/- under the head “income from other sources” has been computed. The Assessee, being aggrieved, challenged the aforesaid addition, before the Ld. Commissioner, who though issued 5 notices to the Assessee, however, the Assessee except seeking adjournments on four occasions, made no compliance and therefore in the absence of any documentary evidence/information which the Assessee failed to file despite giving opportunities, the Ld. Commissioner dismissed the appeal of the Assessee by presuming and

Heard the parties and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, in spite of affording various opportunities by the Ld. Commissioner, the Assessee made no compliance and on four occasions out of 5, sought adjournments only and therefore the Assessee does not deserve any leniency, however, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances in totality, as the Ld. Commissioner in the absence of relevant reply/documents was unable to decide the issue involved in its right perspective and proper manner, hence for the just decision of the case and for substantial justice, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order and consequently remanding the same to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, however, subject to deposit of token amount of Rs.11,000/- in the account of the Revenue Department within 15 days of the receipt of this order. Suffice to say, the Ld. Commissioner shall afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim before the Ld. Commissioner.

We also direct the assessee to cooperate with the appellate proceedings and to file the relevant submissions/documents which would be essential and required by the Ld. Commissioner for proper adjudication of the case. We clarify that in case of further default the assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency. Hence, the case is remanded accordingly. In the result, the instant appeal i.e. ITA No.2993/M/2024 filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes in the above terms.