What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the matter back to the AO. The AO is to decide the issue afresh after considering the additional evidence provided by the assessee.

The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 3,84,781 due to non-reconciliation of a sundry creditor, M/s Nutech Packing. The assessee provided reconciliation before the CIT(A), but it was not accepted as additional evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in refusing to accept the reconciliation of sundry creditors as additional evidence. The core issue is the AO's addition due to non-reconciliation.

Anand Duplex Ltd., Meerut vs JCIT | ITAT Delhi 2016

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES : A : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL, AM & SHRI K.N. CHARY, JM

For Appellant: Shri Raja Kumar, Advocate, Shri S.K. Jain, DR

Hearing: 19.12.2016Pronounced: 19.12.2016

This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by the CIT(A) on 09.01.2015 in relation to the assessment year 2010-11.

The only issue raised in this appeal is against the confirmation of an addition on account of non-reconciliation of sundry creditor.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the AO made, inter alia, an addition of Rs.3,84,781/- on account of non- reconciliation of sundry creditor, namely, M/s Nutech Packing.

The assessee furnished explanation and reconciliation before the ld. CIT(A). The same was refused to be accepted by the ld. CIT(A) as additional evidence as the same, in his view, was not covered under any of the exception clauses of Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. The assessee is aggrieved against confirmation of the addition.

After considering the rival submissions and perusing the relevant material on record, we find that the assessee did not have reconciliation of the account of M/s Nutech Packing at the time of assessment, which was made available before the ld. CIT(A), who refused to accept the same. Without going into the merits of the same, we set aside the impugned order on this score and remit the matter to the file of the AO for deciding this issue afresh as per law in the light of the additional evidence which the assessee is seeking to file.

Needless to say, the assessee will be allowed an opportunity of hearing in such fresh proceedings and it will also be entitled to give any other fresh evidence in support of the claim.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order Pronounced in the open Court on 19.12.2016.

ANAND DUPLEX LTD.,MEERUT vs. JCIT, MEERUT

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments