9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1554X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ew Delhi [Ld.CIT(A)] in respective assessment orders passed by the Assessing Officer [AO] tabulated hereunder: Sr. Nos. ITA Nos. CIT(A) Order dated Assessment Order dated Remarks 1-2 ITA No.196/Del/2022 & Co.No.21/Del/2023 23.11.2021 26.12.2018 Assessment Order under section 153C/144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3-4 ITA No.197/Del/2022 & Co.No.24/Del/2023 23.11.2021 -do- -do 5-6 ITA No.198/Del/2022 & Co.No.22/Del/2023 24.11.2021 -do- -do 7-8 ITA No.199/Del/2022 & Co.No.25/Del/2023 -do- -do- -do 9-10 ITA No.200/Del/2022 & Co.No.23/Del/2023 23.11.2021 -do- -do 11 ITA No.2407/Del/2024 28.02.2024 19.12.2018 Assessment Order under section 153A/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 12 ITA No.2408/Del/2024 -do- -do- Assessment Order under section 153C r.w.s 153A/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 13 ITA No.2409/Del/2024 -do- -do- -do 14 ITA No.2410/Del/2024 -do- -do- -do 15 ITA No.2411/Del/2024 -do- -do- -do 16 ITA No.2412/Del/2024 -do- -do- -do 17-18 ITA No.201/Del/2022 &C.O.No.26/Del/2023 25.11.2021 26.12.2018 Assessment Order under section 153C/14 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ries of the entry receipts on substantive basis. The Ld.CIT(A has also reversed the commission income on the ground that the commission income has accrued to Shri Anand Kumar Jain & Shri Naresh Kumar Jain who were the persons behind managing and controlling various said concerns and nothing has been earned by the company itself. The Ld.CIT(A) has ignored the basic fact that entries have been routed through the assessee companies which were distinct legal entities and thus income earned by way of commission, if any, can be taxed only in the hands of company and it is trite that income assessed on wrong hands will not prevent the Revenue from assessing the right person. 5. On being inquired by the Bench that when the assessee company was struck off from the Registrar of Companies at the relevant time on whose behest appeals were filed before the Ld.CIT(A) and similarly cross-appeal/C.Os filed before the ITAT how the compliance of s.140 of the Act was made for verification of the captioned appeals. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the former Director of the respective companies have signed the appeal memo in the absence of any alternative. 6. It is observed that aggri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... venue. 8. In the context, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has referred to the decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Pramod Sharma [2024] 468 ITR 258 (Cal.) for the proposition that the additions under s. 68 of the Act by the AO is not permissible where the assessee company is found to be accommodation entry provider. 9. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has also referred to the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in Omni Firms (P). Ltd. vs DCIT(HQ), Central Circle-111, New Delhi [2017] 85 taxmann.com 241 (Del.) that the Ld.CIT(A) has rightly granted relief and reversed the additions made by the AO where the assessee was found to be a mere entry provider and a conduit. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee thereafter had adverted to the cross-objection and pointed out that the addition has been struck off from the Registry under the Companies Act and thus stood disallowing by virtue of an order dated 03.04.2017 issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs. On being asked, the assessee however could not furnish whether when was the return of income filed and whether any return of income was filed under s. 153C proceedings. On being further ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aries, we are not in a position to either sustain the action of the Ld.CIT(A) or dislodge the action of the Ld.CIT(A). It will thus equitable to restore the appeal to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for adjudication afresh in accordance with law. It shall be open to the assessee to place arguments and adduce evidences as may be considered expedient to defend the stand of the assessee on the subject matter of dispute. 13. Apart from the merits, the restoration of the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) is also desired owing to the fact emerging that the company was struck off from the records of the RoC by order dated 03.04.2017. Therefore, the authority of the assessee before the Ld.CIT(A) to file appeal on behalf of the non-existent company calls for examination to ascertain the maintainability of the appeals before the Ld.CIT(A). Coupled with this, it has also been brought to our knowledge that the NCLT vide its order dated 03.04.2019 has restored the assessee company in the case of M/s. Karda Traders Pvt.Ltd. and some other companies. 13.1. The assessee by its cross-objections has also raised the maintainability of assessment order in the light of the fact that company was not existing at t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
