DCIT, CIRCLE-12(1), NEW DELHI vs. IDEATIN STUDIO PVT. LTD, NEW DELHI

The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of ld. CIT(A)-4, New Delhi dated 24.12.2018. 2. The Assessing Officer made disallowance of Rs.2.48 Cr. on account of expenses under heads,

The main plea taken up by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) was that the additions have been made merely because notices issued u/s 133(6) have been returned unserved or were 2 Ideation Studio Pvt. Ltd. not complied with while ignoring plethora of evidences submitted to prove the genuineness of the transaction.

After examination of the entire details filed by the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition holding that the payments have been made through running accounts and all the vendors are identifiable their PAN numbers have been given and in many cases confirmed accounts of the ledger have been filed which have been ignored by the AO. Even, before us, the assessee has taken us through paper book wherein TDS returns have been filed. The ld. CIT(A) has also held that “adequate evidences were filed before the AO to substantiate the expenses and it was unfair and totally uncalled for on his part to ignore the same particularly when it is noticed that no further enquiry or efforts have been made to support the adverse conclusion drawn by him as disallowance has been made only for the reason that there was no compliance or satisfactory compliance of the notices by the vendor u/s 133(6)”. All the details of expenses on the payments have been part of the paper book which have been already filed before the revenue authorities. Hence, keeping in view, the entire facts before us, we find no reason to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT(A).