SUSHEE TTS JV,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed
ITA 714/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jan 2023AY 2019-20
Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Sushee Tts Jv Vs. Dy. C.I.T Hyderabad Circle 6(1) Pan:Absfs5848K Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca Revenue By: Shri Kumar Aditya, Dr Date Of Hearing: 24/01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 25/01/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20/10/2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac, Delhi Relating To A.Y.2019-20. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Firm Carrying On The Business Of Work Contracts. It Filed Its Return Of Income U/S 139(1) Of The I.T Act On 31.10.2019 For The A.Y 2019-20, Declaring Total Loss Of Rs.29,618/- & Claimed Refund Of Rs. 5,16,127/-. The Cpc Bengaluru In The Intimation U/S 143(1) Of The Act Dated 15.6.2020 Computed The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.68,82,806/- Wherein An Amount Of Rs.69,12,416/- Was Added U/S 40(A)(Ia) Of The Act Being 30% Of The Sub-Contract Expenditure Of Rs.2,30,41,386/- On The Ground That As Per The Page 1 Of 5
For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 30Section 40
disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act.
4. The Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in restricting his observations to the facts available till passing of intimation passed u/s 143(1), in as much as it was observed that there is no error in the intimation, making the appeal process as 'rectification of error apparent from record