The New Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) remanded the Assessing Officer’s ( AO ) addition under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 matter, which was based on a mismatched photograph in the loan creditors’ voter ID and bank statement photos. The matter was remanded to provide the assessee an opportunity to present proper evidence before the AO.
Gayatri Sewa Sansthan (assessee), a society located in Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh received unsecured loans from M/s Baldev Promoters Pvt. Ltd. and Shri Raju Khan for the assessment year 2015-16.
Get a Copy of Income Tax Rules, Click here
The assessing officer found that the photograph of the Managing Director of Baldev Promoters Pvt. Ltd., differed between the bank statement and the voter ID card. The assessee hadn’t produced any evidence regarding the issue. The assessing officer added Rs.6,92,500 as undisclosed income.
Aggrieved by the order, the assessee appealed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Unfortunately, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition of the AO. Then, the assessee appealed before the ITAT, New Delhi claiming the CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition and that was the interest paid on an unsecured loan from Baldev Promoters Pvt. Ltd.
The assessee’s counsel cited earlier decisions with identical issues by the Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for the assessment years 2010-11, 2012-13, and 2014-15, where the matter was restored to the assessing officer for further verification. On the other hand, the revenue’s counsel had no objection to the assessee’s submission.
Challa Nagendra Prasad, the Judicial Member hears both side’s arguments and perused the orders of the Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for earlier years. The tribunal adjudicated the identical issue for the assessment year 2010-11 where it was held that the assessee failed to produce the directors of M/s Baldev Promoters Pvt. Ltd. and Shri Raju Khan. However, the assessee produced some documents. Considering this, the tribunal remanded the matter to AO for further verification.
Get a Copy of Income Tax Rules, Click here
Similarly, the tribunal adjudicated the identical issue for the assessment years 2012-13 and 2014-15 where it was held that the revenue had not brought any contrary material to support their statement. Thus, the tribunal remanded the matter to the AO to give sufficient opportunity for the assessee to present his case.
Upon reviewing the two orders, the tribunal decided to restore the file to the assessing officer to provide the assessee an adequate opportunity to be heard and then decide the matter on merits. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
