ALLIANCE BOOKS SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,COOCHBEHAR vs. ACIT, CIR. 2(1), JALPAIGURI

These are appeals preferred by the assessee against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”]even dated 21.12.2023 for the AYs2014-15 & 2017-18 respectively. First of all we shall take up the .

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the assessment u/s 143(3) dated 14.12.2016, was passed in the case of the assessee wherein no addition was made on account of legal charges of ₹4,50,591/-, bank charges & interest o fRs.49,58,052/- and commission expenses u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act of ₹6,85,091/-.

The ld. DR left the issue to the wisdom of the bench.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we note that the proceedings, before the ld. AO as well as ld. CIT (A) attained finality when the assessee did not respond to the various notices issued by these authorities. We note that proceedings u/s 13 sub section 2 of the SARFASI Act were initated against the assessee resulting into taking over the premises by the bank and consequently, no compliance could be made. Considering the present facts and circumstances, we are inclined to set aside the order of ld. CIT (A) by restoring the issue to the file of the ld. AO with a direction to decide the same afresh after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

The only issue raised at the time of hearing is against the confirmation of additions by ld CIT(A) of (i) ₹1,13,17,518/- as unexplained u/s 68 of the Act on account of foreign remittance, (ii) ₹53,490/- in respect of income tax debited in the Profit and Loss account and (iii) ₹79,503/- in respect of and legal charges including ROC charges which were added by the AO in the assessment framed.

The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 23.12.2017, declaring total income of ₹6,37,850/-. The case of the assessee was selected for completed scrutiny and accordingly, statutory notices were duly issued and served upon the assessee. During the assessment proceedings, there was no compliance from the assessee’s side and consequently, the additions of ₹1,13,17,518/- was made by the ld. AO u/s 68 of the Act as unexplained expenditure towards the foreign remittance besides making another addition of ₹53,490/- and ₹79,503/- in respect of income tax debited in the Profit and Loss account and legal charges including ROC charges respectively thereby, assessing the income at ₹1,28,41,360/- vide order dated 26.12.2019, passed u/s 143(3) of the Act.

Similarly, the ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex- parte when the assessee failed to respond various notices.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the ld. AO has made three disallowances and additions when the assessee failed to furnish the necessary evidences before the ld. AO. Similarly, the ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal in limine. So far as the first addition is concerned, we find merit in the contention of the assessee that the forms 15CA were already available before the ld. AO on the web portal

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes