Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: A: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA
ORDER PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, J.M. This appeal has been filed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-2, New Delhi dated 27.06.2019 for AY 2010-11. 2. The grounds of assessee are as follows:-
1. 1. That the order of CIT(Appeals) 2 (CIT A) dated 27-06-2019 confirming the addition made by Income Tax Officer Ward 4(2) (AO), is illegal, unjust and opposed to facts.
2. That the Ld. CIT-A and Ld. AO have both erred on Facts of the Case and in law, in making an assessment and confirming the addition on a non-existent person.
3. That the service of notice by affixture on 31-03-2017 in the name of non-existent person is an invalid service, the assessment in pursuance of such invalid service is illegal.
4. That the notice w/s 148 is illegal, since: a) Ld. AO has issued notice w/s 148 without proper application of mind and without recording proper satisfaction after due verification of records. b) Notice has been issued to a non-existent person which is an invalid notice.
Notice is issued on wrong foundation that no return was filed by the appellant, whereas the appellant had filed its return for AY 2010-11.
5. That on the Facts of the Case and in law, the Ld. AO and Ld. CIT-A have both erred in assessment of income of Rs. 17,90,671/- as if earned and received, when the appellant had neither earned nor received such interest income during the year as per copy of audited financial statements filed.
That on the Facts and Circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO and Ld. CIT-A have both erred in confirming addition of Rs. 17,90,671/- u/s 68 of The IT Act, when no such amount was found credited in the books of account maintained by the appellant for the previous year, the illegal addition be deleted.
That the illegal assessment be annulled and addition of Rs. 17,90,671/- be deleted.
First of all, the ld. Assessee Representative (AR) submitted that the assessee does not want to press ground no. 2 hence the same is dismissed as not pressed.
Ground no. 5 & 6
The ld. AR submitted that on the Facts of the Case and in law, the Ld. AO and Ld. CIT-A have both erred in assessment of income of Rs. 17,90,671/- as if earned and received, when the appellant had neither earned nor received such interest income during the year as per copy of audited financial statements filed. He further contended that on the Facts and Circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO and Ld. CIT-A have both erred in confirming addition of Rs. 17,90,671/- u/s 68 of The IT Act, when no such amount was found credited in the books of account maintained by the appellant for the previous year, the illegal addition be deleted. The ld. AR submitted that from the copy of return of income filed by the assessee and computation available at pages 5 to 7 clearly reveals that the assessee has neither earned nor received impugned interest income during the year and no such amount was credited to the books of accounts of assessee maintained and audited by the competent auditor therefore no addition, u/s. 68 or any other provision of the Act was required to be made.
Replying to the above the ld Senior DR supported that orders of the authorities below and submitted that the AIR Information available through the system reveals that assessee had received payment of Rs. 17,90,671/- on which TDS of Rs. 1,79,067/- u/s 194A of the Act was deducted by the payee M/s. Ecos India Mobility and Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. The ld. Senior DR submitted that the payee did not respond to the notice u/s. 133(6) of the Act dated 13.10.2017 and it was received back unserved therefore the Assessing Officer was right in having adverse inference against the assessee therefore addition may kindly be upheld.