Badshah Abdul Patel Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)
ITAT Pune held that addition toward unexplained expenditure is liable to be deleted since assessee inadvertently mentioned ‘commission expense’ instead of actual ‘construction expenses. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
Facts- The assessee is a Contractor/Builder with Material contract/Labour. The case of the assessee was selected for Complete Scrutiny. AO observed from the profit and loss account that the assessee has debited Rs.21,28,710/- as commission expenses. However, in response to notice u/s.142(1), the assessee has not submitted details to substantiate the commission expenses. In the circumstances, AO made addition of Rs.21,78,710/- as unexplained expenditure invoking the provisions of section 37(1) of the Act. NFAC confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Conclusion- Held that the assessee has actually incurred ‘Construction Expenses’ at Rs.21,28,710/- but due to inadvertent mistake committed while filing the income-tax return has mentioned it as ‘Commission Expenses’. I therefore set-aside the order of the ld.CIT(A)/NFAC and delete the addition made by the Assessing Officer. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT PUNE
This appeal by the assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2018-19 is directed against the order dated 30.09.2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) which inturn is arising out of the Assessment Order passed u/s.143(3) r.w. as 143(3A) & 143(3B) dated 03.03.2021.
