Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-I, Lucknow vs. M/s Mohamed Bagh Club, Limited

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee club filed a return declaring total income of Rs.38,91,760/- on 27.09.2014. The case was selected for limited scrutiny due to a higher turnover reported in the service tax return compared to the income tax return. The assessee was asked to explain the difference of Rs.2,79,02,368/-. The assessee argued that the difference was due to entrance and restoration fees, restaurant services, and reverse charge/joint charge mechanism. The Assessing Officer added back the amount of Rs.2,79,02,368/- as extra and undisclosed receipts. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A) who deleted the addition. The Revenue appealed to the ITAT, which dismissed the appeal.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Deletion of addition by CIT(A) without calling for a remand report
• 2. Deletion of addition by CIT(A) on account of entrance and restoration fees

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Partly Assessee / Partly Revenue.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• ITO, WARD 19(1) vs. ORIENTAL STITCH PVT. LTD.

  Delhi Bench ‘E’ : New Delhi benchAY 2018-19Allowed

• Debasish Banerjee vs. ITO, Ward-44(1), Kolkata

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2018-19Allowed

• ITA No.3367/Ahd/2014

  Ahmedabad bench

• S. Balaji Mech-Tech Private Ltd. vs. ITO, Ward 22 (1), 3696, Sharadhanand Marg, New Delhi.

  Delhi bench

• MSB E Trade Securities Ltd. vs ACIT Central Circle-18 Delhi

• The Jalgaon District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Jalgaon

  Pune bench