IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCHES "F" : DELHI
BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA.No.8813/Del./2019
Assessment Year 2016-2017
Shri Vipul Mittal,
The ACIT, Circle-63(1),
4316/16, Saini Market,
Bahadurgarh, Sadar Bazar, vs.
New Delhi.
Delhi 110 006.
PAN AGBPM6134C
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Shri S. Krishnan, And
For Assessee :
Shri V. Rajkumar, Advocates
For Revenue : Shri Amrit Lal, Sr. DR
Date of Hearing : 16.03.2020
Date of Pronouncement : 16.03.2020
ORDER
PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.
This appeal by Assessee has been directed
against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-33, Delhi, Dated
28.10.219, for the A.Y. 2016-2017, challenging the addition
of Rs.1,42,51,085/- on account of disallowance of sundry
creditors,
2
ITA.No.8813/Del./2019
Shri Vipul Mittal, Delhi.
2. Briefly the facts of the case are that assessee is
an individual and filed return of income for the assessment
year under appeal declaring income of Rs.75,74,660/-. The
case was selected for limited scrutiny. The A.O. noted that
reason for selection of the case was that assessee should
explain sundry creditors of Rs.13.17 crores in the books of
account. The A.O. issued notices under section 133(6) to 12
parties, but, no response have been received from 04
parties. The A.O. noted that notices have been delivered to
the following parties/sundry creditors.
No. Name Amount
1. Shiv Shakti Enterprises Rs. 10,74,990/-
2. Om Plastic Rs. 66,46,458/-
3. Kurele Packaging Pvt. Ltd., Rs. 46,24,293/-
4. HPCL Mittal Energy Ltd., Rs. 19,05,344/-
Total Rs.1,42,51,085/-
2.1. The A.O. in the absence of any explanation of the
aforesaid 04 sundry creditors, made addition of
Rs.1,42,51,085/-.
2.2. The assessee contended before the Ld. CIT(A) that
all the transactions were conducted through banking
3
ITA.No.8813/Del./2019
Shri Vipul Mittal, Delhi.
channel and payments are made in next year through
banking channel. Assessee maintained regular books of
account. All purchases are verified. The parties have filed
confirmation, but, after completion of the assessment. The
Ld. CIT(A), however, did not accept the contention of
assessee and confirmed the addition and dismissed the
appeal of assessee.
3. After considering the rival submissions we are of
the view that the matter requires reconsideration at the level
of the A.O. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that
assessee produced complete documentary evidences before
A.O. in respect of the above 04 sundry creditors which are
trade creditors in nature. The documents filed were -
complete ledger, Bank statement reflecting all payments are
made through banking channel, ledger of creditors to show
payment have been made in next year, all entries are
verified. The A.O. instead of deciding the issue on merits,
merely confirmed the addition because the parties have not
responded to the notice issued under section 133(6) of the
I.T. Act, 1961. He has submitted that parties have been
4
ITA.No.8813/Del./2019
Shri Vipul Mittal, Delhi.
confirmed the transactions and filed confirmations, but,
after completion of the assessment. Therefore, this should
have been looked into by the Ld. CIT(A) as well. He has
submitted that assessee is willing to produce all the above
04 parties before A.O. for verification of the transactions as
per Law.
4. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied upon the
Orders of the authorities below.
5. Considering the facts of the case in the light of
undertaking given by the Learned Counsel for the Assessee
and documentary evidences on record, we are of the view
that the matter requires reconsideration at the level of the
A.O. It is an admitted fact that assessee produced sufficient
documentary evidences before A.O. to prove that the credits
are prima facie genuine in nature. However, the A.O. has
not discussed any of the documentary evidences in the
assessment order. The A.O. in the absence of any response
from the side of the sundry creditors which are 04 in
number, made the addition. Learned Counsel for the
Assessee has given undertaking before us to produce all the
5
ITA.No.8813/Del./2019
Shri Vipul Mittal, Delhi.
above 04 sundry creditors for examination before A.O. for
verification of the transactions. Therefore, in these
circumstances and in the interest of justice, we are of the
view that matter requires reconsideration at the level of the
A.O. We, accordingly, set aside the Orders of the authorities
below and restore the matter in issue to the file of A.O. with
a direction to re-decide this issue by considering the
documentary evidences on record and by giving reasonable,
sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The
assessee shall produce all the aforesaid 04 sundry creditors
before A.O. for examination by the A.O. as per Law, for
verification of the transactions. The A.O. shall pass
reasoned order discussing the merits of the case as per Law.
Accordingly, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical
purposes.
6. In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed for
statistical purposes.
6
ITA.No.8813/Del./2019
Shri Vipul Mittal, Delhi.
Order pronounced in the open Court.
Sd/- Sd/-
(O.P. KANT) (BHAVNESH SAINI)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Delhi, Dated 16th March, 2020
VBP/-
Copy to
1. The appellant
2. The respondent
3. CIT(A) concerned
4. CIT concerned
5. D.R. ITAT `F' Bench, Delhi
6. Guard File.
// BY Order //
Assistant Registrar : ITAT Delhi Benches :
Delhi.
|
