RESPONSE INDIA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1),, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2071/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 November 2024AY 2006-2007Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma (Judicial Member), Shri Rakesh Mishra (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the assessee's failure to adequately participate in earlier proceedings and granted an opportunity to present its case. The matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication after allowing the assessee to submit evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed its return of income, but during reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer found a discrepancy between the TDS credit claimed and the income booked in the Profit & Loss account. The assessee failed to provide reconciliation, leading to a best judgment assessment.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a fair opportunity to present its case and reconcile the income discrepancy during reassessment and appeal proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 151,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH KOLKATA

Before: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

order

: November 28, 2024 आदेश / ORDER

Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member:

1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 07.08.2024 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its original return of income declaring a total income of Rs.3,06,250/-. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer recorded reasons to believe that certain income has escaped assessment. Subsequently, proceedings u/s 147 of the Act was initiated after obtaining requisite approval from the competent authority u/s 151 of the Act. The assessee through a letter dated 06.11.2012 requested that the original return to be treated as return filed in compliance to the notice u/s 148. Subsequently, notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued to the assessee. In compliance to the Assessment Year: 2006-07 Response India Pvt. Ltd notices, the ld. AR sought time to respond but failed to appear next scheduled date. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment based on available records observing a discrepancy in income reported by the assessee. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had claimed TDS credit of Rs.4,78,900/- but failed to book corresponding income in the Profit & Loss A/c. the Assessing Officer found that the income credited by the assessee was Rs.75,90,370/- whereas TDS certificate reflected income of Rs.99,71,318/- resulting in a discrepancy of Rs.23,80,948/. As the assessee has failed to provide credible evidence to reconcile this difference, the Assessing Officer passed best judgment assessment u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act.

3.

Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) but failed to furnish adequate explanations and also failed to reconcile the discrepancy. Therefore, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

4.

Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee has come in appeal before this Tribunal stating that certain documents were submitted before the ld. CIT(A) in order to substantiate its claim but these were not properly considered by the lower authorities. Therefore, the ld. AR of the assessee sought one more opportunity before us to present its case so as to reconcile the discrepancy before the ld. CIT(A). He, therefore, prayed before the Bench that the matter may be remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to allow the assessee to substantiate its claim with appropriate evidences.

5.

On the other hand, the ld. DR did not object to such prayer made by the ld. AR before the Bench.

Assessment Year: 2006-07 Response India Pvt. Ltd 6. We, after hearing the rival submissions and reviewing the materials on record, find that the assessee did not able to adequately participate before the Assessing Officer and also ld. CIT(A) which led to ex parte assessment. The ld. AR has duly asserted that he has sufficient documents to reconcile the discrepancy. Therefore, in the interest of natural justice and in order to provide a fair opportunity, we deem it appropriate to remand the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) is directed to reconcile the discrepancy after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to furnish all necessary documents including reconciliation statement to substantiate its claim without fail. The assessee is also directed to cooperate fully with the ld. CIT(A) in the remand proceedings.

7.

In terms of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Kolkata, the 28th November , 2024.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →