Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi
Vats Pharma Pvt. Ltd.,, Meerut vs Assessee on 5 February, 2016
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH 'H', NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No. 1988/Del/2013
Assessment Year: 2006-07
M/s Vats Pharma Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO, WARD 2(1),
84/A, Hill Street, Meerut
Meerut
(PAN: AAACV7932P)
(APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)
Appellant by : Sh. R.K. Garg, Adv.
Respondent by : Sh. V.R. Sonbhadra, Sr. DR
Date of Hearing : 03-02-2016
Date of Order : 05-02-2016
ORDER
PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M.
This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the Order dated 13.2.2013 of Ld. CIT(A)-Meerut pertaining to assessment year 2006-07 on the following grounds:-
"(1) That the Ld. Lower authority has erred to hold that AO was justified to pass an order without entertaining the documents and providing adequate opportunity. The finding is arbitrary, unjust, uncalled for and against the natural justice.
(2) That under the facts and circumstance of the case, the Ld. AO has erred to confirm the disallowance of Rs. 2,68,315/-, being 20% of expenses, claimed at Rs. 13,41,575/-. The confirmation of ITA NO.1988/DEL/2013 2 disallowance based on ground no 2., is arbitrary, unjust, uncalled for, illegal and highly excessive."
2. The facts narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed by both the parties, hence, the same are not repeated here for the sake of brevity.
3. At the time of hearing, Sh. R.K. Garg, Advocate / Ld. Counsel of the Assessee stated that the lower authorities has not given sufficient opportunity to the assessee for substantiating its claim before them. He requested that opportunity for substantiating the claim before the AO may be given because the assessee is having all the necessary evidences.
4. On the contrary, Ld. DR relied upon the order passed by the lower authorities and stated that sufficient opportunity has already been given by the authorities below, hence, there is no need to send back the case to the AO.
5. We have heard both the parties and perused the relevant records especially the orders passed by the Revenue Authorities and we are of the view that AO as well as Ld. CIT(A) has not given sufficient opportunity to the assessee for substantiating its claim before them. We find that the documentary evidences filed by the assessee in the shape of the Paper Book before us wherein the Ld. Counsel of the assessee has certified and confirmed that the papers/ documents from Serial No. 1 to 26 have already been filed before the AO as well as before the Ld. CIT(A). We further find that he has filed a Paper Book containing pages 1 to 98 in which he has attached various documentary evidences viz. Copy of written submission, as filed before CIT(A) ITA NO.1988/DEL/2013 3 dated 7.1.2001; copy of application u/r 46A, as filed before the CIT(A) dated 15.11.2010; confirmed copy of account of unsecured loan of Rs. 35,000/- of Smt. Sheela Devi for AY 2006-07 and 2005-06, as filed before CIT(A); confirmed copy of account of unsecured loan of Rs. 8,98,167/- of Sh. Vivek Kumaria and Neeraja Kumaria for AY 2006-07 and 2005-06, as filed before CIT(A); Confirmed copy of account of unsecured loan of Rs. 93,551/- of Sh. Suraj Sharma for AY 2006-07 and 2005-06, as filed before CIT(A); Confirmed copy of account of unsecured loan of Rs. 3,50,000/- of Sh. SN Sharma for AY 2006-07 and 2005-06, as filed before CIT(A); Confirmed copy of account of unsecured loan of M/s Tirupati Network for AY 2006-07, as filed before CIT(A); confirmed copy of account of unsecured loan of M/s Tirupati Network for AY 2006-07, as filed before CIT(A); Copy of interest account, as filed before CIT(A); copy of rent (freight) account for Rs. 17,082/-, as filed before CIT(A); Copy of electricity account, as filed before CIT(A); copy of repair account, as filed before CIT(A); copy of account of salary, as filed before CIT(A); copy of account of labour welfare, as filed before CIT(A); copy of advertisement account, as filed before CIT(A); copy of travelling account, as filed before CIT(A); copy of miscellaneous account, as filed before CIT(A); copy of affidavit, alongwith medical report, drug license and notice, as filed before CIT(A); copy of remand report, as received from CIT(A); copy of submission, against remand report, as filed before CIT(A) and copy of profit and loss account and balance sheet, as filed before AO. Keeping in view of the Certificate given by the Ld. Counsel of the assessee, we are of the view that authorities below have not properly appreciated the documents filed by the assessee which in our opinion, needs thoroughly examination at the level of the AO. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we set aside the issue in dispute to the file of the AO to decide the same afresh, after ITA NO.1988/DEL/2013 4 examining all the evidences/documents and give adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, under the law.
6. In the result, Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 05/02/2016.
Sd/- Sd/-
(L.P. SAHU) (H.S. SIDHU)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 05/02/2016
*SR BHATNAGAR*
Copy forwarded to: -
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(A)
5. DR, ITAT
TRUE COPY By Order,
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR