Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Sar Parivahan Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs Department Of Income Tax

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal5 January 2015

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Assessing Officer cannot add both the debit and the credit difference arising from a reconciliation of the assessee's balances with a third party's confirmation. Where the figures remain unreconciled, the Assessing Officer may add the difference on one side only, either the debit side or the credit side, and not both, and the matter is to be restored for fresh adjudication after reconciliation, with the assessee given an opportunity of being heard.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

आयकर अपील य अधीकरण, यायपीठ - "C" कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "C" BENCH: KOLKATA (सम )Before ी महावीर संह, यायीक सद य एवं/and ी शामीम याहया, लेखा सद य) [Before Shri Mahavir Singh, JM & Shri Shamim Yahya, AM]

आयकर अपील सं या / I.T.A No.1196/Kol/2010 नधॉरण वषॅ/Assessment Year: 2004-05

Income-tax Officer, Ward-10(3), Kolkata Vs. M/s. SAR Parivahan Pvt. Ltd. (PAN: AAHCS3892C) (अपीलाथ /Appellant) ( यथ /Respondent)

Date of hearing: 05.01.2015 Date of pronouncement: 05.01.2015

For the Appellant: Shri Rama Prasad Nag, Sr. DR For the Respondent: N o n e

आदेश /ORDER

Per Shri Mahavir Singh, JM :

This appeal by revenue is arising out of order of CIT(A)-XII, Kolkata in Appeal No. 233/XII/Ward-10(3)/07-08 dated 15.03.2010. Assessment was framed by ITO, Ward-10(3), Kolkata u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for Assessment Year 2004-05 vide his order dated 28.12.2006.

2. The only issue in this appeal of revenue is against the order of CIT(A) deleting the difference in debit and credit balances detected by the revenue for collecting information u/s. 133(6) of the Act. For this, revenue has raised following ground:

"On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the difference of debit and credit balances detected on the basis of information collected by issuing notice u/s. 133(6) of the I. T. Act."

3. We have heard Ld. Sr. DR and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. The AO during the course of assessment proceedings had taken information from the debtor Hindustan Copper Ltd. regarding the balances maintained with the assessee. As per the reply of Hindustan Copper Ltd. there is difference between assessee's submission and the information gathered u/s. 133(6) of the Act and the AO made addition of difference of debit balance at Rs.6,78,500/- and credit balance at Rs.7,37,500/-. According to AO, the relevant difference reads as under:

"(a) Debit balance shown by assessee totaling to Rs. 8,32,000/-

(As per AO) 2 ITA No.1196/K/2010 M/s. SAR Parivahan Pvt. Ltd. AY 2004-05

Less: As reflected by Hindustan Copper Ltd.

In their reply Rs.2,53,000 Difference of debit balance added : Rs.6,78,500 (b) Credit balance shown by assessee on receipt of earnest money refund Rs.8,50,000 Less: As reflected by Hindustan copper Ltd. in their reply Rs.1,12,500 Difference of credit balance added back: Rs.7,37,500"

The AO added both the debit and credit balances. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A), who deleted the difference.

4. We have gone through the orders of lower authorities and arguments made by Ld. Sr. DR. We find that the AO has made addition of debit and credit balances, which in our opinion is not possible. However, the assessee is also unable to reconcile the figures regarding difference in debit and credit balances. Even before CIT(A), the assessee could not reconcile the figures and CIT(A) without any basis deleted the addition. In view of the above, we set aside the issue back to the file of AO for fresh adjudication after taking reconciliation from both the parties. The AO will add a difference of one side only, either debit side or credit side and he cannot add both the sides. Needless to say, the AO will provide opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In term of the above, the appeal of revenue is allowed for statistical purposes.

5. In the result, appeal of revenue is allowed for statistical purposes.

6. Order is pronounced in the open court.

Sd/- sd/- शामीम याहया, लेखा सद य महावीर संह, यायीक सद य (Shamim Yahya) (Mahavir Singh) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated : 5th January, 2015 व र ठ निज स चव Jd.(Sr.P.S.) आदेश क त ल प अ े षतः- Copy of the order forwarded to:

1. अपीलाथ /APPELLANT - ITO, Ward-10(3), Kolkata,

2 यथ /Respondent M/s. SAR Parivahan Pvt. Ltd., 14, N. s. Road, Kolkata-

700 001.

3. आयकर क मशनर (अपील)/ The CIT(A), Kolkata

4. आयकर क मशनर/ CIT Kolkata

5. वभा गय तनीधी / DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata स या पत त/True Copy, आदेशानुसार/ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार/Asstt. Registrar.

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free