9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 1392X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ress and phone number of Smt. Nilima, proprietor of M/s AD Enterprises. Assessee has also filed details of payments made to M/s AD Enterprises not only in current year but also the payments made in preceding year and subsequent year. Ld. AR is also justified in submitting that non-filing of income-tax return and no response of the notice u/s 133(6) by Smt. Nilima is not under the control of assessee and the assessee cannot be punished for this. The submission of Ld. AR that the assessee is engaged in the business of real estate and the services taken from M/s AD Enterprises in the nature of various job works like moram filling, chambers, road, boundary wall, drainage line, etc. were very much required by assessee to build the structures, is also meritorious. We may mention here that the assessee has deducted substantial amount of TDS from payments made to M/s AD Enterprises, remitted the proceeds of TDS to income-tax department and also filed statutory returns of TDS giving each item of payment, TDS etc. against the payee M/s AD Enterprises. TDS returns also contain PAN of Smt. Nilima proprietor of M/s AD Enterprises. The PAN so mentioned is verified and accepted as valid and corre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d us to Para No. 4 and 5 of show-cause notice to point out the premise on which the PCIT has conducted revision. These paras are re-produced below: 4. On perusal of Assessment records, it is found that during the course of scrutiny assessment the genuineness of the payment of Rs. 2,76,06,810/- done by the assessee company to the M/s. A.D. Enterprises, Prop. Nilima W/o Ashish Daniel has not been verified. The AO should have called for the complete vouchers details of the job work done by M/s. AD Enterpsies by referring the matter to the Verification Unit for physical verification but the AO failure to do so, resulted in the under assessment of income to the tune of Rs. 2,76,06,810/-. After going through the case history in the departmental ITBA database of the said case, it was observed that during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee submitted its copy of bank statement showing the payment against job work done by the M/s. AD Enterprises, copies of TDS challan and ledger of M/s. AD Enterprises. It is evident from the documents presented by the assessee that the payment was done to M/s. AD Enterprises, but the fact remains unverified whether the work for which the paym ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any relief without inquiring into the claim; (c) . (d) 5. Having shown the aforesaid background of case, Ld. AR submitted that the PCIT has wrongly invoked revisionary action. To explain this, Ld. AR firstly submitted that the assessment u/s 143(3) had been made by AO which is National e-assessment Centre as per procedure of a rigorous verification evolved by Govt. and therefore, there is no question of lack of bona fides on the part of AO. Secondly, the documents forming part of assessment-record held on record clearly show that during the course of assessment proceeding, the AO has issued several notices u/s 142(1) to assessee and the assessee has also filed adequate replies. This is evident from following documents filed in Paper-Book: (a) Paper-Book Page 25-26: The AO issued notice dated 18.12.2020 u/s 142(1) and raised three specific queries to assessee, viz. (i) to submit financial statements alongwith annexure and computation of income, (ii) to provide details of all payments above Rs. 10,000/- at one time and Rs. 50,000/- in aggregate, made to contractors giving name, PAN, current address, phone number of the contractors alongwith comparative details of payments made in cu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pted. Ld. AR submitted that the above noting made in assessment-order by the AO who happens to be the National e-assessment Centre, Delhi is very clear and leaves no ambiguity at all. This noting coupled with all queries raised by AO through various notices u/s 142(1) and replies filed by assessee, as narrated in foregoing paragraph, clearly demonstrate that the AO has aptly considered the item of scrutiny and after due consideration, did not make any addition and accepted the returned income of assessee. 7. With aforesaid submissions, Ld. AR contended that the revision-order passed by PCIT is very much invalid in this case and the same must be quashed. 8. Per contra, Ld. DR for revenue supported the revision-order. He submitted that the PCIT has noted certain vital aspects in revision-order, namely (i) Smt. Nilima proprietor of M/s AD Enterprises has not filed any income-tax return of AY 2018-19, (ii) The AO issued notice u/s 133(6) to Smt. Nilima but no response was received. Therefore, the expenses made by M/s AD Enterprises for job work remained unverified, and (iii) The AO could have referred matter to the Verification Unit for physical verification but it was not done. Ld. DR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ook as discussed in foregoing paras of this order, which clearly show that the AO has issued multiple questionnaires u/s 142(1) and made repeat enquiries to examine the expenses claimed by assessee in general and payments made to M/s AD Enterprises in particular. The assessee also filed complete replies to those questionnaires. To this extent, there cannot be any dispute or rebuttal by revenue. Clearly, therefore, it is discernible that the AO has considered those replies/submissions and thereafter taken a plausible view. Further, the action of AO in accepting the replies/ submissions of assessee cannot not lack bona fides and cannot be said to be faulty specially when the assessment of assessee has been made by National e-assessment Centre, Delhi. With regard to various objections raised by PCIT in revision-order and also contended by Ld. DR qua M/s AD Enterprises, we find that the Ld. AR for assessee is very much correct in arguing that the assessee filed complete point-wise replies to AO; that all payments were made through banking channel and bank statements were duly filed; that the assessee deducted TDS and filed copies of TDS returns/ challans; that the assessee filed PAN, c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
