A F ENTERPRISES LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2797/DEL/2022Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 July 2023AY 2017-184 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the AO should have provided a finding regarding the purchases made by the assessee for the items claimed to have been sold. The Tribunal also noted the assessee's contention that the parties might have claimed set off of TCS in their returns.

What were the facts?

The assessee made cash sales to two parties, Fashion King Garments Ltd. and Ganesh Enterprises. The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 46,39,000/- on account of these cash sales, stating that these firms were closed. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made by the AO under Section 68 was justified without verifying the purchases made by the assessee and the status of the buyer's assessments, and whether the assessee was given an effective opportunity to present its case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT

Hearing: 27.07.2023Pronounced: 31.07.2023

This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, pertaining to the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee has raised following ground of appeal:

Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘CIT(A)’] erred on facts and in law in the impugned order dated 28.09.2022 passed in Appeal No. CIT(A), Delhi-1/10391/2019-20 confirming the addition of Rs. 46,39,000 made by Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-1(1), New Delhi [‘AO’] under section 68 of the Income tax Act, 1961 [the ‘Act’] in the assessment order dated 08.12.2019 passed for Assessment year [‘A.Y.’] 2017-18 under section 143(3) of the Act.”

2.

The only effective ground in this appeal is against confirming the addition of Rs. 46,39,000/- . Facts giving rise to the present appeal are that in this case return was filed electronically declaring income of Rs. 3,50,350/-. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment and the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Income tax Act, 1961 [the ‘Act’] was framed. Thereby the AO made addition of Rs. 46,39,000/- in respect of cash sales made to Fashion King Garments Ltd. and Ganesh Enterprises.

Aggrieved against this the assessee preferred appeal before learned CIT(Appeals), who after considering the submissions sustained the addition. Aggrieved against this the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

3.

Learned counsel for the assessee vehemently argued that the authorities below were not justified in sustaining the additions. He further reiterated the submissions as made in the written synopsis. He submitted that the assessee was not given effective opportunity to explain and provide the necessary confirmation from the parties. He submitted that the parties have confirmed their account. TCS provisions are applicable in respect of sales made by the assessee. He submitted

that the assessee is ready to provide confirmation from the parties above mentioned.

4.

Learned DR opposed the submissions and supported the orders of authorities below.

5.

I have heard rival contentions and perused the material available on record.

The issue in the present appeal in dispute related to the additions of Rs. 21,39,000/- and Rs. 25,00,000/- in respect of Fashion King Garments Ltd. and Ganesh Enterprises. The AO has noted the cash deposited by the assessee. However, the AO has not given any finding regarding the purchases in the assessment order the AO noted that on inquiry it was found that these firms are closed. The explanation of the assessee is that it had made cash sales to these two parties. Considering the totality of the facts I am of the considered view that the AO should have given finding in respect of purchases made by the assessee for the items which were claimed to have been sold to these entities. Further, it is contention of the assessee that those parties might have claimed set off of the TCS in their respective returns of income. Hence, the impugned order is set aside. The assessment is restored to the file of AO to verify the correctness of the claim of the assessee that it had made sales in cash to these parties and what is the status of their assessment by the AO.

Ground raised is this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in open court on 31st July, 2023.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →