Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC-II’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI H. S. SIDHU
ORDER This appeal is filed by assessee against the order dated 31.3.2016 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-30, New Delhi relating to Assessment Year 2012-13 on the following grounds:-
The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30 (Herein after CIT (A)) has erred, both on facts and in law by sustaining the addition of bank interest of Rs 12,04,172/- without considering the submissions of the assessee & stated - case laws including of jurisdictional honorable Delhi High Court as follows and accordingly prayed for its deletion.
1.1. Assessee submitted & duly accepted by the Ld ITO & CIT (A) also of assessee having Rs 2.53 Crores as interest free funds against which alleged Rs 1.97 Crores have been paid & under these circumstances no disallowance should be made as assessee is having more funds in comparison to alleged funds given. Honourable DHC has also similarly held in the stated case laws but Ld CIT(A) ignored this vital aspect and confirmed additions.
1.2. Assessee submitted & duly accepted by the Ld ITO & CIT (A) that out of Rs 1.97 Crores, Rs 1.07 Crores have been given to unrelated parties for business purpose & under these circumstances no disallowance should be made as per stated case laws of jurisdictional DHC but Ld CIT(A) ignored this vital aspect and confirmed additions.
1.3. Assessee proved through bank statement & other evidences that bank funds have been used only for business purpose, the fact never contravened by the A.O. & CIT(A) except in general that assessee doesn't require bank funds & under these circumstances no disallowance should be made as per stated case laws of jurisdictional DHC but Ld CIT (A) ignored this vital aspect and confirmed additions.
1.4. Assessee submitted & duly accepted by the Ld ITO & CIT (A) also that even in case of total Rs 3.45 Crores mixed funds (Non Interest bearing Rs 2.53 Crore + Bank Funds of Rs 0.92 Crores), presumption should be made that non- interest bearing funds have been used for alleged advances to associate concerns of Rs 1.97 Crores & no disallowance should be made as per stated case laws of jurisdictional DHC but Ld CIT (A) ignored this vital aspect and confirmed additions.
2. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal.
Facts narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed by both the parties, hence, the same are not repeated here for the sake of brevity.
During the course of hearing, Ld. Counsel of the assessee stated that assessee has filed all the necessary documentary evidences before the AO as well as before the Ld. CIT(A) which has not been considered by the AO as well as Ld. CIT(A). He requested that the issue in dispute may be set aside to the AO to decide the same afresh, as per law after considering the evidences filed by the assessee. He has filed the Paper Book containing pages 1 to 66 having the copy of Paper Book submitted to Ld. CIT; copy of letter dated 23.3.2016 submitted to Ld. CIT(A) and the copy of letter dated 30.3.2016 submitted to Ld. CIT(A). He has also attached a Certificate that all the aforesaid papers, the assessee has filed before the AO and requested that in the interest of justice matter may be set aside to the AO for fresh adjudication. Hence, he requested that the issues involved in the present appeal may be set aside to the file of the Ld. AO to decide the same afresh under the law, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
On the contrary, Ld. DR opposed the request of the Ld. Counsel of the assessee and relied upon the orders of the authorities below. .
I have heard both the parties and perused the records. I have gone through the order passed by the revenue authorities especially the impugned order as well as the Paper Book containing 1 to 66 pages having the copy of computation of income; Notice & Director Report; Auditor Report; Balance Sheet; Profit and Loss account; Schedule of Balance sheet & P&L; Letters dated 8.12.2014, 17.12.2014, 22.1.2015, 28.1.2015, (2nd letter) dated 28.1.2015, 11.2.2015, 24.2.2015, 20.11.2014, copy of letter dated 23.3.2016 & 30.3.2016 to CIT(A)-XXX. In my view, the said documents needs to be examined at the level of the AO in order to decide the issues in dispute which he has not considered, as stated by the Ld. Counsel of the assessee.
Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the issues are remitted back to the file of the AO to decide the same afresh, as per law. The AO is directed to consider the issues in dispute afresh after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to fully cooperate with the AO and did not take any unnecessary adjournment and file all the necessary papers before him to substantiate its case.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 20/01/2017.