KUNDAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE, THANE
In the result, impugned order is set-aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed
ITA 1729/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2023AY 2017-18
Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Ms. Padmavathy Sआअसं. 1729/मुं/2022 (िन.व. 2017-18) आअसं. 1730/मुं/2022 (िन.व. 2018-19) Kundan Industries Ltd. Kundan House, Harisiddhi Estate, Gorai Pada, Vasai (East), Palghar, Maharashtra-401208. Pan: Aaack6811G ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Jt.Cit , Tds Range, Ground Floor, Qureshi Mansion, Gokhale Road, Naupada, Thane (West)-400602. ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Sh. Rahul Hakani, Advocate "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Sh. Prakash Kishinchandani, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 03/08/2023 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 09/08/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm These Two Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Pune (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Cit(A)’) For The Assessment Years (Ay) 2017-18 & 2018-19, Respectively. Both The Impugned Orders Are Of Even Date I.E. 20.05.2022. Since, The Grounds Raised In 2 आअसं. 1729 & 1730/मुं/2022(िन.व. 2017-18 & 2018-19) Ita Nos. 1729 & 1730/M/2022 (Ay 2017-18 & 2018-19) Both The Appeals & The Facts Germen To The Grounds Of Appeals Are Identical, These Appeals Are Taken Up Together For Adjudication & Are Decided By This Common Order.
For Appellant: Sh. Rahul Hakani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Prakash Kishinchandani, Sr. DR
Section 271C
disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act and other additions were also made in the assessment order, which are accepted by the assessee and the demand raised as per assessment order has been paid. Therefore, these circumstances would clearly reveal that the assessee has reasonable cause for failure to comply with the provisions of section.
Therefore
