IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD B-SMC BENCH : Hyderabad Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member And Shri Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member ITA No. 979/Hyd./2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s Sunder Synthetics Private Limited vs. ITO, Ward 3(4) 1-7-228/44, U.B. Complex Hyderabad Paradise Circle Secunderabad 500 003 PAN: AADCS3983J (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assesse: Smt. Anam Siddiqui, A.R. For Revenue: Smt. Matta Padma, D.R. Date of Hearing : 30/07/19 Date of Pronouncement : 05/09/19 ORDER Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. This is assessee s appeal for A.Y. 2009-10 against order of Ld.CIT(A)-8, Hyderabad dated 22nd March, 2018. 2. Brief facts of case are that assessee company, in business of manufacturing of decorative laminated sheets, filed its return of income for A.Y. 2009-10 on 25/09/2009 declaring income of Rs.25,51,200/-. Thereafter, assessee filed revised return of income on 23.12.2010 by declaring income of Rs.5,26,199/-. Meanwhile, there was search u/s 132 of I.T. Act, 1961 in case of assessee along with Sundar Steel Group of cases. assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of Act was completed on 31.12.2010 by making addition on account of supervision charges of Rs.10,00,000/- and fuel expenses of Rs.31,06,169/- respectively by A.O. issue travelled up to ITAT which set aside order of CIT(A) for giving reasonable opportunity to assessee on issue of addition of Rs.31,06,169/- ITA No. 979/Hyd./2018 AY 2009-10 Sunder Synthetics P Ltd., Secunderabad as fuel charges. Consequent thereto, A.O. required assessee to produce books of accounts, which were furnished. AO observed that assessee has made payments of Rs.28,97,889/- on single day by cash and Rs.2,08,280/- by cheque to single person by name Shri Ramesh Kumar. Therefore, he considered cash payments of Rs.28,98,889/- as doubtful. assessee was asked to furnish address and PAN details of Shri Ramesh Kumar and confirmation of payment made to him. Since assessee could not produce Shri Ramesh Kumar, A.O. proceeded to disallow fuel charges claimed by assessee. 3. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A), who confirmed order of A.O. because assessee could not produce Mr.Ramesh Kumar to confirm payment of fuel charges. 4. Aggrieved assessee came in second appeal before us by raising following grounds of appeal. 1. In computing total income learned assessing officer has disallowed following and Honourable CIT(A)-8 has erred in upholding same: (a) Disallowance of fuel expenditure to extent of Rs.31,06,169/-. 2. For that, your petitioner craves right to put additional grounds at time of appeal. 5. At time of hearing on 12.07.2019, assesssee reiterated submissions made before A.O. and when Bench asked if assessee can produce Mr.Ramesh Kumar, Ld.Counsel for assessee agreed for same. Therefore, case was adjourned to 30.07.2019. On 30.07.201 Ld.Counsel for assessee produced person who claimed to be Mr.Ramesh Kumar. He also confirmed orally that he has received fuel charges from assessee. Since assessee has produced person by name Sri Ramesh Kumar before us and his identity and genuineness is to be verified by lower authorities, we deem it fit and proper to remand issue to file of AO with direction to assessee to produce Mr.Ramesh Kumar before him along with confirmation letter. A.O. shall then reconsider case on merits in accordance with law. Needless to mention that assessee shall be given 2 ITA No. 979/Hyd./2018 AY 2009-10 Sunder Synthetics P Ltd., Secunderabad fair opportunity of hearing. Accordingly, we allow appeal for statistical purposes. 6. In result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in Open Court on 05th September,2019. Sd/- Sd/- (S.RIFAUR RAHMAN) (P MADHAVI DEVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 05th September, 2019. GMV Copy forwarded to: 1. M/s Sunder Synthetics P Ltd., 1-7-228/44, UB Complex, Paradise Circle, Secunderabad 500 003. 2. ITO, Ward-3(4), Hyderabad. 3. Pr.CIT-3, Hyd. 4. D.R. ITAT Hyderabad 5. Guard File // C o p y 3 ITA No. 979/Hyd./2018 AY 2009-10 Sunder Synthetics P Ltd., Secunderabad 1. Draft dictated on 02/08/19 2. Draft placed before author 05/08/19 3. Draft placed before second Member 4. Draft approved by second Member 5. Approved Draft comes to SrPS 6. Kept for Pronouncement 05/09/19 7. File sent to Bench Clerk 4 Sunder Synthetics Private Limited v. ITO, Ward3(4), Hyderabad