LOKENATH INVESTMENT CONSULTANTS P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2206/DEL/2019Status: HeardITAT Delhi16 November 2023AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI KUL BHARAT (Judicial Member)3 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found no infirmity in the order of the authorities below regarding the charging of interest. Therefore, the disallowance of Rs. 81,250/- as unexplained expenditure was confirmed.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 81,250/- on account of unexplained expenditure on commission, treating the assessee as a paper company used for routing unaccounted funds. The CIT(A) upheld this addition.

What were the issues?

Whether the commission earned by the assessee for routing funds is to be treated as unexplained expenditure and added to its income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 37

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI

For Respondent: Ms. Nimisha Singh, CIT DR
Hearing: 16.11.2023

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Lokenath Investment Consultants P. Ltd., vs. ACIT, Central Circle 8, 2nd Floor, 19, Local Complex, New Delhi. Near Pushpa Bhawan, Madangir, New Delhi – 110 062. (PAN : AABCL5792L) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : None REVENUE BY : Ms. Nimisha Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 16.11.2023 Date of Order : 16.11.2023

ORDER

PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals)-24, New Delhi dated 07.01.2019 for the assessment year 2014-15.

2.

Ground of appeal taken by the assessee reads as under :-

“That on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXIV, New Delhi [‘the Ld. CIT (A)’] has erred in upholding the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Income tax, Central Circle-08, New Delhi (the Ld. Assessing Officer) in upholding the addition of Rs.81,250/- made u/s 37 of the Act on account of alleged unexplained expenditure on commission.”

3.

Brief facts of the case are that AO made addition of Rs.32,50,000/- in the hands of the assessee for routing money which is unexplained on protective basis. Thereafter, AO also made ADDITION for unexplained expenditure by observing as under :-

“It is established that the assessee company is a paper company and has been utilised for channelizing the unaccounted funds of M/s. Surya Agrotech Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Generally the entry operators charge 2-3% of total entry-value as commission, the assessee company has not shown this income in the relevant A.Y. The assessee company has given entry of Rs.32,50,000/- in this year, for which commission @ 2.5% works out to Rs.81,250/-. This amount is added to the income of the assessee company.”

4.

Upon assessee’s appeal, ld. CIT (A) deleted the protective addition and upheld the addition of interest as unexplained expenditure and he upheld substantive addition in the hands of Surya Agrotech Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd..

Ld. CIT (A) deleted the protective addition in the hands of the assessee.

5.

Against the above order, assessee has filed appeal before us. None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite notice. We have heard the ld. DR for the Revenue and perused the records.

6.

We note that the only issue raised before us is regarding the interest of Rs.81,250/- under section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). We find no infirmity in the order of authorities below regarding charging of interest, hence disallowance of Rs.81,250/- is confirmed.

7.

Before parting, we may observe that we have only addressed the issue raised by the assessee and no appeal by the Revenue has been brought to our notice in this regard.

8.

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on this 16th day of November, 2023.

More judgments on Section 37

All 4,334 judgments and leading authorities on Section 37 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →