Total Integrated Design (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO/ I.T.A.No.7964/Del/2018/A.Y.2012-13

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH “SMC-1” NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

I.T.A No.7964/Del/2018
Assessment Year:2012-13

Total Integrated Design (India) बनाम ITO
Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ward 25(3)
LGF-7A, Mandakini NRI
Complex, Greater Kailash IV, C.R. Building,
New Dlehi. New Delhi.

PAN No. AAACT3502B ÿÂयथê/Respondent
अपीलाथê Appellant

िनधाªåरतीकìओरसे /Assessee by Ms. Gunjan Jain, CA
राजÖवकìओरसे /Revenue by Sh. Ved Prakash Mishra, Sr. DR

सुनवाईकìतारीख/ Date of hearing: 26.11.2020
उĤोषणाकìतारीख/Pronouncement on 27.11.2020

आदेश /O R D E R

PER N.K. BILLAIYA, A.M.

1. This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the

CIT(A)—9, New Delhi dated 14.09.2018 pertaining to AY 2012-13. The

grievance of the assessee reads as under:

1) “Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the
allegations made by the Ld. AO and upheld by Ld. First
Appellate Authority are grossly arbitrary and bad at law as
the Ld. AO made an addition of undisclosed income of Rs.
7,94,160/- without considering the fact that the TDS was
deducted twice on the receipt/income of the said amount.

1
Total Integrated Design (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO/ I.T.A.No.7964/Del/2018/A.Y.2012-13

2) Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the allegations
made by the Ld. AO and upheld by Ld. First Appellate
Authority are grossly and bad at law as the Ld. AO made an
addition of undisclosed income of Rs. 1,59,935/- without
considering the fact that the TDS was deducted twice on the
receipt/income of the said amount.

3) Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the allegations
made by the Ld. AO and upheld by Ld. First Appellate
Authority are against the facts of the case and bad at law as
the Ld. AO made an addition of undisclosed income of Rs.
1,26,845/- based on the information as per 26AS without
considering the fact that the client while filing TDS return
inadvertently had entered amount of Rs. 4,31,273/- instead
of Rs. 3,04,428/-.

4) Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the allegations
made by the Ld. AO and upheld by Ld. First Appellate
Authority are grossly arbitrary and bad at law as the Ld. AO
made an addition of undisclosed income of Rs. 1,85,394/-
based on the information as per 26AS without considering the
fact that the said income pertained to the next year and was
duly accounted for in the ITR of the following year.

5) Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the allegations
made by the Ld. AO and upheld by Ld. First Appellate
Authority are grossly arbitrary, baseless and bad at law as the
Ld. AO made an addition of undisclosed income of Rs.
2,06,810/- due to an inadvertent mistake made by the
assessee.

6) Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the allegations
made by the Ld. AO and upheld by Ld. First Appellate
Authority are grossly arbitrary, baseless and bad at law as the
Ld. AO made an addition of undisclosed income of Rs. 3,845/-

2
Total Integrated Design (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO/ I.T.A.No.7964/Del/2018/A.Y.2012-13

based on the information as per 26AS without considering the
fact that this bill was issued for reimbursement of expenses
and the same was duly accounted for.
7) Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the orders
passed by the Ld. First Appellate Authority are factually
incorrect and without considering the evidence/documents
produced before the ld. CIT(A).”

2. Representatives of both the sides were heard at length. Case
records carefully perused.
3. The cursory look at the grievance of the assessee would show that
all the additions have been made on the basis of information as per form
26AS. The Counsel for the assessee before us vehemently stated that
even though reconciliation was filed before the AO the AO did not care to
examine the details and made the addition. It is the say of the Counsel
that the name of the tax deductor was changed and the tax deductor
cancelled the earlier entries in form 26AS and uploaded new entries in
the new name and, therefore, two entries are reflected in form 26AS for
the same transaction hence, resulted into the duplicacy of the entries.
4. We have carefully gone through the relevant documentary
evidences. We find that the entire addition has been made on mismatch
of entries in form 26AS, whereas the reason for the same has been
successfully explained by the assessee.
5. We are of the considered view that the AO and the First Appellate
Authority without applying their mind has mechanically made the

3
Total Integrated Design (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO/ I.T.A.No.7964/Del/2018/A.Y.2012-13

additions on the basis of entries found in form 26AS without giving any
weightage to the reconciliation/explanation by the assessee.
6. In the interest of justice and fair play, we direct the AO to
examine carefully the explanation of the assessee and decide the issue
afresh as per the provisions of law. For the sake of repetition, we make
it clear that the AO should apply his mind in considering the explanation
of the assessee in respect of the mismatch. With these directions the
issues restored back to the file of the AO and the appeal is treated as
allowed for statistical purpose.

7. The decision announced in the open court in the presence of
Representatives of both sides.

Sd/- Sd/-
(MADHUMITA ROY) (N.K. BILLAIYA)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dated: 27th November, 2020
*Kavita Arora, Sr. P.S.

Copy of order sent to- Assessee/AO/Pr. CIT/ CIT (A)/ ITAT (DR)/Guard
file of ITAT.

By order

Assistant Registrar, ITAT: Delhi Benches-Delhi

4