DCIT Circle, Aaykar Bhavan, South Shivaji Nagar, Sangli-416416, Maharashtra. Vs. Bharat Electrical Contractors & Manufacturers Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. H1/2, Kupwad, Sangli-416436, Maharashtra.

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Bharat Electrical Contractors & Manufacturers Pvt. Ltd., is a private company that filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2022-23 on 04.11.2022, disclosing a total income of Rs. 1,11,44,420/-. The case was selected for scrutiny, and the Assessing Officer (AO) found discrepancies in the balances of creditors and made additions under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, totaling Rs. 11,29,91,920/-. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)), who deleted the disallowance under Section 80IA of the Act and directed the AO to verify the claims and grant relief. The revenue appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the CIT(A) erred in admitting additional evidence without providing the AO an opportunity to examine or rebut the evidence.
• 2. Whether the CIT(A) erred in accepting additional evidence and remanding the matter to the AO for verification.
• 3. Whether the CIT(A) erred in setting aside the addition made by the AO under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
• 4. Whether the CIT(A) failed to appreciate the discrepancies in the balances of creditors.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Partly Assessee / Partly Revenue.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Hindustan EPC Company Ltd Vs. DCIT

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Harun Ali vs. Pr.CIT

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2015-16Allowed

• Aman Jain vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward 34(5), New Delhi

  Delhi Bench ‘A’, New Delhi benchAY 2021-22Allowed

• Devendra Tiwari (AY: 2016-17)

  SMC BENCH, DELHI benchAY 2016-17Allowed

• Atul U Rege HUF v/s Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

  Mumbai bench

• Rajbala Chaudhry vs. ITO Ward – 1

  Chandigarh bench