Tribunal upholds Commissioner's decision on trade payables & interest expenditure, quashes assessment order due to procedural irregularities.

The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)' decision regarding the legitimacy of trade payables and related interest expenditure, dismissing the revenue's appeal. Furthermore, the Tribunal quashed the assessment order under Section 143(3) due to procedural irregularities stemming from the Joint Commissioner of Income-tax's directions under Section 144A, which were issued without providing the assessee an opportunity to be heard. The assessment proceedings were deemed illegal and void, leading to the annulment of the assessment order.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Legitimacy of trade payables and related interest expenditure.
2. Validity of the assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, based on directions issued by the Joint Commissioner of Income-tax (JCIT) under Section 144A without providing an opportunity to the assessee to be heard.

Summary:

Issue 1: Legitimacy of Trade Payables and Related Interest Expenditure

The revenue challenged the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], which accepted the assessee's claim that the amount shown as "Trade Payable" was certified by a Statutory Auditor and filed before the Registrar of Companies (ROC). The Assessing Officer (AO) had added the trade payables under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the grounds that there was an increase in trade payables despite no substantial business activities during the assessment year 2013-14. The AO was not convinced by the assessee's explanation that the funds were received from M/s. Ruchika Global Interlinks Pvt. Ltd., transferred to SLO Steel Ltd., and finally adjusted against dues payable to other group companies.

The CIT(A) found that the transactions were genuine and routed through proper banking channels, supported by confirmation letters from the creditors and sister concerns. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the assessee provided all necessary evidence, including ledger extracts and bank statements, proving the genuineness of the transactions. The Tribunal emphasized that the AO's additions were based on suspicion and lacked factual basis. The Tribunal cited the Supreme Court's decision in CIT vs Lovely Exports Ltd and the Gujarat High Court's decision in DCIT vs Rohini Builders to support its conclusion that the assessee had satisfied the conditions under Section 68 of the Act.

Issue 2: Validity of Assessment Order under Section 143(3) Based on Directions Issued by JCIT under Section 144A

The assessee contended that the assessment order was invalid as the JCIT issued directions under Section 144A without providing an opportunity to the assessee to be heard, as required by the proviso to Section 144A. The Tribunal noted that the JCIT issued directions on his own motion, and the AO's assessment was based on these directions. The Tribunal found that the directions were prejudicial to the assessee and were issued without providing the required opportunity to be heard, violating the proviso to Section 144A.

The Tribunal concluded that the assessment proceedings were vitiated due to this procedural lapse, rendering the assessment order illegal and void. Consequently, the Tribunal quashed the assessment order passed by the AO under Section 143(3).

Conclusion:

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal regarding the legitimacy of trade payables and related interest expenditure, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision. Additionally, the Tribunal allowed the assessee's cross-objection, quashing the assessment order due to the procedural lapse under Section 144A. The order was pronounced on 10th May 2023 at Chennai.

---