ITAT Hyderabad Judgments — September 2020

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without proper hearing and merely reproduced the AO's observations. Therefore, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits after giving the assessee an opportunity to be heard.

The Tribunal directed the deletion of a significant portion of the addition related to Form 26AS discrepancies, remitting a small part for further reconciliation. It also deleted the addition related to salary payments to key personnel and the difference between the cash book and bank statement. A partial disallowance was confirmed for unreconciled travel and office expenses.

The Tribunal found that audited books of account were furnished and could not be ignored without reason. It held that failure to get accounts audited by the due date has separate penal provisions. Therefore, the appeals were remanded for de-novo adjudication based on audited books.

The Tribunal held that the issue was squarely covered by its own previous decisions for earlier assessment years. In the absence of any distinguishing features or contrary decisions brought by the revenue, the order of the CIT(A) was upheld.

The Tribunal decided to remit the matter back to the Assessing Officer (AO) for de novo consideration. This was due to the submission of fresh evidence by the assessee and the fact that the assessee had failed to appear before the CIT(A), leading to an ex-parte order.

The Tribunal held that if the difference amount represents service tax collected and remitted, it cannot be treated as turnover. The matter was remitted back to the AO for fresh consideration.