SUSHIL KUMAR NAHATA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-49(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In this appeal the assessee has raised as many as eight grounds amongst which the ld.AR of the assessee contended to take up ground nos.1 & 2 as preliminary issue. Therefore, we proceeded to hear the appeal on such grounds.

The ld. AR further submits that the AO added an amount of Rs.4,59,000/-, which was debited by the assessee in its Profit and Loss account under the head ‘Irrecoverable Balances IT A No. 987/Kol/16 Sushil Kumar Nahata 1 Written off. He submitted that before the AO the assessee provided the names and addresses of the parties, M/s. Apurba Art, Navi Mumbai (Rs.2,34,000/-) and M/s. Deepjaya Graphics, Kolkata (Rs.2,25,000/-). Accordingly, the AO issued notices u/s. 133(6) of the Act by the AO. In response to such notice, M/s. Apurva Art, Navi Mumbai vide letter dated 18-12-2012 stated that it does not have any sale/purchase/advance, loans taken or given to/from the said party during the financial year 2009-10 or previous next year. The notice u/s. 133(6) of the Act, which was sent to M/s. Deepjaya Graphics in the given address was returned with postal remarks ’not known’. Therefore, an inspector was deputed by the AO, who vide report dated 20-12-2013 stated that there was no existence of M/s.Deepjaya Graphics. In view of above since genuineness of claim of assessee in respect of Rs.2,34,000/- and Rs.2,25,000/- has not been established by producing any authentic evidence, the AO disallowed the sum of Rs.4,59,000/- (Rs.2,34,000 + Rs.2,25,000) and added the same to the total income of assessee.

The assessee challenged the same before the CIT-A. Before him the assessee filed written submission on 29-01- 2016. The CIT-A after going through the said submissions directed the assessee to produce the ledger account of both the parties from the year in which the sales were affected to A.Y 2010-11 and the other details i.e when amounts are written off, copy of invoices & delivery challans in original, extract of sale register and copy of audited a/c and break up of sundry debtors. Since no body was attended by producing any IT A No. 987/Kol/16 Sushil Kumar Nahata 2 document/evidence before the CIT-A, the CIT-A confirmed the impugned addition of Rs.4,59,000/- . 5. Before us the ld.AR submits that the assessee could not produce any relevant evidence/document regarding the impugned addition/disallowance as made by the AO on account bad debt written off and further submits that now the assessee is ready to produce such evidence to substantiate his claim. Thus, he urged to remand the issue to the file of the AO for his fresh consideration.

On the other hand, the ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities.

Heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that in absence of any representation and evidence to substantiate his claim on behalf of assessee, the CIT-A confirmed the impugned addition for non compliance. We find that before the CIT-A the assessee submitted only written submission and there was no proper representation by the assessee. The ld. AR filed details of amount debited under the head ‘Sales tax paid’ to Profit & Loss account, Copies of challans of VAT & CST, Copies of notice of demand and order sheet under Sales tax proceedings and Copy of letter of assessee to Apurva Art requesting to provide Form ‘C’. Therefore, taking into consideration the submission of the ld.AR that the assessee is now ready to submit all such details as directed by the CIT-A before the AO, we deem it fit and appropriate to remand the issue to the file of the AO for his fresh consideration and to pass an order as per law after giving the assessee adequate opportunity of hearing. The assessee IT A No. 987/Kol/16 Sushil Kumar Nahata 3 shall be at liberty to file requisite evidences to substantiate his claim properly. Therefore, grounds 1 & 2 are allowed and other grounds are allowed for statistical purpose.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 17/03/2017 Sd/- Sd/- Dr. Arjun Lal Saini S.S. Viswanethra Ravi Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated 17 -03-2017 *PP/SPS: Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant/Assessee: Shri Sushil Kumar Nahata 36/1 Canal Street, Sreebhumi, Kolkata-700048. 2 The Respondent/Department: The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ Income Tax Officer, Ward 49(2), 54/1 Rafi Ahmed Kidwai Road, 2nd Floor, Kolkata-700016. 3 The CIT(A) The CIT 4. DR, Kolkata Bench 5.