BRIJBHOOMI SHEETALAYA INDIA P LTD,MAINPURI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, FARRUKHABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 337/AGR/2018Status: DisposedITAT Agra25 April 2025AY 2010-11Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged that the assessee was not heard sufficiently and, considering the principles of natural justice, granted another opportunity for the assessee to present its case.

What were the facts?

The assessee, running a cold storage business, received share capital and unsecured loans. Upon inquiry, some creditors did not respond to notices, leading the AO to make additions to the income. The CIT(A) confirmed the assessment due to insufficient documentary evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the additions made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) were justified given the lack of sufficient documentary evidence presented by the assessee, and whether the assessee should be granted a further opportunity to present its case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 68,Section 69C,Section 133(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” BENCH, AGRA

Before: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

(िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year:2010-11) M/s. Brijbhoomi Sheetalaya DCIT, Circle 2(1), बनाम/ India (P) Ltd. Farrukhabad. VPO Chirara, Sultanganj Vs. G.T. Road, Mainpuri. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AADCB-7653-A (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : None ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 20-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 25-04-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11 arises out of an order passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Aligarh [CIT(A)] on 24-01-2018 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 05-02- 2013. At the time of hearing, none appeared for assessee. The Ld. Sr. DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeal. Upon perusal of caser records, the appeal is disposed-off as under.

2.

The assessee runs cold storage for potatoes. It transpired that the assessee received share capital of Rs.69.60 Lacs and unsecured loans of Rs.62.95 Lacs from 4 persons as tabulated in para-3 of the assessment order. The assessee had outstanding sundry creditors for Rs.12.80 Lacs also. Upon enquiry, it was found that two creditors did not respond to notices issued u/s 133(6) and accordingly, Ld. AO made addition of Rs.7.43 Lacs in the hands of the assessee. The claim of share capital and unsecured loans was partially accepted and Ld. AO made addition u/s 68 for Rs.23.83 Lacs and u/s 69C for Rs.10.90 Lacs and Rs.34.42 Lacs. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment for want of sufficient documentary evidences from the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

3.

Keeping in mind the principles of natural justice, we deem it fit to grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate its stand before Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication with a direction to the assessee to substantiate its case.

4.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced u/r 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →