2013 (5) TMI 18 - AT - Income Tax

Addition in respect of share capital, unsecured loans, sundry creditors & cash & bank balance for want of verification of genuineness - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that - As assessee had not filed any return of income and as per assessment order the case was selected as per guidelines of CBDT/ AO vide notice dated 6.12.2010 asked the assessee to submit return of income on or before 10.12.2010. As the case was becoming time bared, AO completed the assessment u/s 144 by adding the balances as appearing in the balance sheet. As per P&L account it appears that company had no business income. It had only interest income on income tax refund against which certain expenses were claimed. In the earlier year also, there was no business income. The copy of balance sheet strengthen the findings of CIT(A) that AO had just taken the balances appearing as on the date of balance sheet and computed the income which is totally wrong and unjustified. All balances appearing in the balance sheet are old outstanding balances. The only difference is in the amount of unsecured loan, the amount of which had reduced from Rs.15,63,835/- to Rs.13, 98,835/- and similarly there is a reduction in the amount of sundry creditors due to payment of some of them. Similarly, there is some change in the amount of cash and bank balances which seems to be on account of part payment of sundry creditors. CIT(A) had rightly deleted the addition - Against revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against order of Ld CIT(A) dated 19.7.2011.
2. Admission of additional evidence by Ld CIT(A).
3. Deletion of additions made by Assessing Officer in respect of share capital, unsecured loans, sundry creditors, and cash & bank balance.
4. Request for leave to add, alter, or amend grounds of appeal.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the revenue against the order of Ld CIT(A) dated 19.7.2011, contending that the order was erroneous and contrary to facts and law. The grounds raised included issues related to the admission of additional evidence by the assessee and the deletion of various additions made by the Assessing Officer.

2. The case involved the admission of additional evidence by the assessee before Ld CIT(A) under Rule 46A(3). The assessee filed necessary documents along with a letter stating prevention from filing them before the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer opposed the admission of additional evidence, arguing that the additions were made based on available documents. However, Ld CIT(A) considered the submissions and remand report, concluding that the additions were related to old outstanding balances only.

3. The Ld CIT(A) deleted the additions made by the Assessing Officer concerning share capital, unsecured loans, sundry creditors, and cash & bank balance. The Ld CIT(A) observed that all these amounts were old and no fresh additions were made during the assessment year. The Assessing Officer's justification for the additions was found to be unjustified, leading to the deletion of the said amounts from the total income of the assessee.

4. The revenue appealed to the Tribunal, arguing that the deletion of additions based on additional evidence was incorrect. The revenue contended that the assessee had sufficient opportunities to file necessary documents earlier. However, the Tribunal upheld the decision of Ld CIT(A), stating that no further verification was necessary as the additions were based on old outstanding balances and there was no fresh addition in the relevant year.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the revenue, affirming the decision of Ld CIT(A) to delete the additions made by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the order of Ld CIT(A) and upheld the deletion of the said amounts from the total income of the assessee.