Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee failed to appear for hearings, and notices were repeatedly issued. The Assessing Officer rejected the assessee's books of accounts due to mismatches in service tax and income tax returns, and unverified purchases, loans, and other discrepancies. The CIT(A) upheld the rejection of books and most additions.
Held
The Tribunal held that since the tax authorities proceeded on the basis of rejected books of account, and the assessee failed to appear or provide contrary evidence, the additions made were justified. The appeal of the assessee was found to have no substance.
Key Issues
Whether the disallowances made by the Assessing Officer were justified when the assessee failed to appear and produce books of accounts after their rejection.
Sections Cited
143(3), 145(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH, ‘C’: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER
Year: 2014-15] HIM Restaurants Private Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-11(3), 23/16, East Patel Nagar, Vs New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110008 Or CA Chander Prakash, 207 Padma Tower II, 22 Rajendra Place, New Delhi-110008 PAN-AACCH7035B Assessee Revenue Assessee by None Revenue by Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 26.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 24.09.2025 ORDER
PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM,
This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against order dated 26.03.2018 of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, New Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)’) in appeal No.751/16-17/CIT(A)- 4, arising out of order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the Income Tax Officer, ward 11(3), New Delhi, pertaining to Assessment Year 2014-15.
At the time of hearing, none appeared for the assessee and notices have been repeatedly issued earlier, therefore, no more opportunity is justified.
On hearing the ld. DR, we find that disallowances were made by the Assessing Officer after rejection of books of accounts. The Assessing Officer Income Tax Return. The Assessing Officer observed that in period of October, 2013 to March, 2014, the assessee had not shown any income from hall booking nor any loss for the period has been shown. The Assessing Officer has examined certain purchases made from ABR Foods & Snacks Pvt. Ltd. and equity of the ledger that audit report was found. The Assessing Officer has examined unexplained cash credit on the basis of unsecured loans, which were doubtful and lastly a disallowance on account of delayed payment of employee’s contribution to Provident Fund (PF) and ESIC was made.
The ld. CIT(A) has upheld the rejection of books of accounts and results declared by assessee as the assessee had failed to produce books of account at all stages. Subsequent additions were also upheld except deleting the delayed deposit to PF and ESIC Contribution.
Now once, tax authorities have proceeded on the basis of rejection of books of account by assuming the same are not maintained, the nature of additions do not warrant any other inferences in the absence of any evidences or submissions to the contrary as the assessee has failed to appear. Accordingly, grounds raised by assessee appear to have no substance. The appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 24th September, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- [KRINWANT SAHAY] [ANUBHAV SHARMA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 24.09.2025 Shekhar