Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi

M/S Alcobex Metals Ltd., New Delhi vs Dcit, New Delhi on 7 November, 2017

                                           1                        ITA No. 3969/Del/2011


                       IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                          DELHI BENCH: 'A' NEW DELHI

              BEFORE SHRI N. K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
                                      AND
                 MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

                       ITA No. 3969/DEL/2011 ( A.Y 2004-05)

     Alcobex Metals Ltd.                          Vs   DCIT
     4223/1, Ansari Road                               Circle-1)1
     New Delhi                                         New Delhi
     AAACA3098H
     (APPELLANT)                                       (RESPONDENT)


                 Appellant by         Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv
                 Respondent by        Sh. B. Ramanjaneyulu, Sr.
                                      DR

                  Date of Hearing                  26.10.2017
                  Date of Pronouncement             07.11.2017

                                      ORDER

PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM

The appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 21/6/2011 passed by CIT(A)-IV, New Delhi.

2. The grounds of appeal are as under:-

"1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in the law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in fact in confirming an addition of Rs.57,45,183/- on account of commission on exports.
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in the law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in fact in confirming an addition of Rs.48,209/- on account of charity and donation."
2 ITA No. 3969/Del/2011

3. The assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing of Non- Ferrous metals. Return showing loss of Rs.21,55,83,857/- for the Assessment Year 2004-05 was filed on 29/10/2004. The case was processed u/s 143(1) of the I.T. Act. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and various notices were issued. The Authorized Representative of the assessee company appeared before the undersigned and filed the details as called for. The addition was made on account of commission on exports to the extent of Rs.57,45,183/- as well as charity and donation for Rs.48,209/- along with other advance by the Assessing Officer .

4. Being aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. The assessee has filed the present appeal in respect of two issued relating to addition on account of commission on exports and addition on account of charity and donation. The CIT(A) observed that the assessee was a sick company and have been referred to BRFI since the factory was closed for 5 to 6 years. The assessee could not get documents for which request was made for admission of the additional evidence under Rule 46A (1) of the Income Tax Rules 1962. Thus, the CIT(A) rejected the additional evidence.

5. The Ld. AR submitted that the matter may be sent back to Assessing Officer and the documents and additional evidence has been procured by the assessee. The same needs to be verified.

6. The Ld. DR objected to the same.

7. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. From the assessment order it is clear that the Assessing Officer made additions only on account of absence of evidence. Though the said evidence was produced before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) has not allowed the same by calling for remand report from the Assessing Officer. Therefore, in the interest of 3 ITA No. 3969/Del/2011 justice it is proper and just to remand back these two issues decided herein afresh before the Assessing Officer. Needless to say, the assessee be given full opportunity of hearing as well as producing the additional evidence before the Assessing Officer and Assessing Officer after verifying the said evidences can decide the issue afresh in accordance with law.

8. In result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 07th November, 2017.

     Sd/-                                                    Sd/-
(N. K. SAINI)                                           (SUCHITRA KAMBLE)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                                       JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated:        07/11/2017
R. Naheed *

Copy forwarded to:

1.                         Appellant
2.                         Respondent
3.                         CIT
4.                         CIT(Appeals)
5.                         DR: ITAT




                                                    ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

                                                      ITAT NEW DELHI




                                             Date

1.   Draft dictated on                    26/10/2017 PS
                                           4                       ITA No. 3969/Del/2011


2.    Draft placed before author          26/10/2017 PS

3.    Draft proposed & placed before            .2017     JM/AM
      the second member

4.    Draft discussed/approved       by                   JM/AM
      Second Member.

5.    Approved Draft comes to the                         PS/PS
      Sr.PS/PS                    7.11.2017

6.    Kept for pronouncement on                           PS

7.    File sent to the Bench Clerk            7.11.2017   PS

8.    Date on which file goes to the AR

9.    Date on which file goes to the
      Head Clerk.

10.   Date of dispatch of Order.