The ITO, Ward-7(2),, Ahmedabad v. Shri Sitarambhai I.Patel, Ahmedabad

ITA 1114/AHD/2007 | 2003-2004
Pronouncement Date: 31-05-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 111420514 RSA 2007
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 1114/AHD/2007
Duration Of Justice 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 15 day(s)
Appellant The ITO, Ward-7(2),, Ahmedabad
Respondent Shri Sitarambhai I.Patel, Ahmedabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 31-05-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 31-05-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 06-05-2010
Next Hearing Date 06-05-2010
Assessment Year 2003-2004
Appeal Filed On 15-03-2007
Judgment Text
-1- INTHEINCOMETAXAPPELLATETRIBUNAL AHMEDABADBENCHCAHMEDABAD BEFORES/SHRIT.K.SHARMA JMANDD.C.AGRAWAL AM INCOME-TAXOFFICER WD7(2) AHMEDABAD. V/S . SHRISITARAMBHAII PATEL PROP.MURLIDHAR TRADERS 6ADESHAPTS. JODHPUR AHMEDABAD. (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANTBY:- SHRIM.C.PANDIT SR.D.R. RESPONDENTBY:- NONE ORDER PERD.C.AGRAWAL ACCOUNTANTMEMBER. THISISANAPPEALFILEDBYTHEREVENUERAISINGFOL LOWINGGROUNDS:- 1.THELD.COMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAX(A) - XIII AHMEDABAD HASERREDINTAWANDONFACTSINDELETINGTHEADDIT IONMADEOF RS. 11 77 097/-BEING THE OUTSTANDING AMOUNT OF FREI GHT CHARGESPAYABLETOVARIOUSCARTINGCONTRACTORS. 2.THE LD.COMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAX(A)-XIII AHMEDABA D HASERREDINLAWANDONFACTSINDELETINGTHEADDIT IONOFRS. 1 95 672/- ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE MADE UNDER SECTION 4QA(2)FB)OFTHEINCOMETAXACT 1961OFCARTINGCH ARGESPAID TOASSESSEE'SWIFEATAHIGHERRATE. 3. ON THEFACTSANDINTHECIRCUMSTANCESOFTHE CASE THELD COMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAX(A)-XIII AHMEDOBADOUG HTTO HAVEUPHELDTHEORDER OF THEASSESSINGOFFICER. ITANO.1114/AHD/2007 ASST.YEAR:2003-04 2 4. IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAX(A)-XIII R AHMEDABADMAYBESET ASIDEANDTHATOFTHEASSESSINGOFFICERBERESTORED . 2. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS A PRO PRIETOR OF M/S MURLIDHARTRADERSDEALINGINTRANSPORTATION/CASTING /TRADINGOFKAPACHI. THEASSESSEEFILEDRETURNOFINCOMEDECLARINGINCOM EOFRS.2 91 458/-. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE AO NOTICED THAT ASSESSEEHASMADEPAYMENTOFRS.11 77 097/-UNDER THEHEADCARTING. THESEPAYMENTSWEREMADETOTHEFOLLOWINGPARTIES: - SL.NO. NAME BALANCEOUTSTANDING 1. BIPINBHAIJAYSWAL 61 522.45 2. CHIRAGN.PATEL 6 13 595.95 3. H.M.RABARI 85 836.00 4. M.V.RABARI 1 16 825.00 5. SHAILA.LADHANI 2 99 317.72 THEAOCALLEDFORTHEDETAILSOFTHESEPARTIESAND FOUNDTHATASSESSEE COULDNOTSUPPLYTHEPANOFTHEPERSONSTOWHOMSUC HPAYMENTSWERE MADE.THEYWEREALSONOTPRODUCEDFORVERIFICATION. ASAMPLESCRUTINYOF THEBILLSRAISEDBYSHRIBIPINJAYSWALINDICATEDTH ATTHEBILLSDIDNOTHAVE PRINTEDNUMBERSANDTHEYWEREUNSIGNEDBYTHEBILL RAISER.THEASSESSEE DIDNOTMAKEANYPAYMENTTOHIMDURINGTHEENTIREY EAR.FROMTHISTHE AOINFERREDTHATASSESSEEHADCREATEDBOGUSCREDITO RSANDBOGUSBILLSARE RAISEDTOEVADETHETAX. 3 3. LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION BY MAKING THE FO LLOWING OBSERVATIONS:- (1) OUTOFTOTALCARTINGEXPENSESCLAIMEDATRS.13 44 044/-THEAO ALLOWED THE CLAIM ONLY AT RS.1 66 947/- ON ACTUAL P AYMENT BASIS. THEREFORE IFPARTPAYMENTISGENUINETHENOTHERPA YMENTWOULDALSOBE GENUINE. (2) THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED COMPLE TE DETAILS OF INCOMEWHICHWASBOOKEDDURINGTHISYEARAGAINSTWH ICHEXPENDITUREOF CARTINGHASBEENCLAIMED.THUSIFCORRESPONDINGINC OMEISTAXEDTHEN EXPENDITUREONEARNINGSUCHINCOMECANNOTBEDISALL OWED. (3) ITISNOTACASETHATOUTSTANDINGLIABILITIESA RESHOWNFORAGOOD NUMBEROFYEARS. 4. BEFOREUS LD.DRSUBMITTEDTHATOPPORTUNITIESH AVENOTBEENGIVEN TOTHEAOTOEXAMINETHEDETAILSSUBMITTEDBYTHEA SSESSEEBEFORELD. CIT(A).SECONDLYCO-OPERATIONWASNOTEXTENDEDTOT HEAO. 5. NONEAPPEAREDONBEHALFOFTHEASSESSEE. 6. GROUNDNO.2RELATESTODELETIONOFADDITIONOFR S.1 95 672/-MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 40A(2)(B) OUT OF CARTING CHARGESPAIDTOTHEWIFEOFASSESSEE.THEAOOBSERV EDTHATCERTAINCARTING CHARGESHAVEBEENPAIDTOSMT.TARABENPATEL WIFE OFASSESSEEWHICHIS INEXCESSBY5.87%WHENCOMPAREDWITHPAYMENTSMADE TOOTHERPARTIES. ACCORDINGLYPAYMENTWASHELDTOBEEXCESSIVEANDWA SDISALLOWED.THE LD.CIT(A)DELETEDTHEADDITIONONTHEGROUNDTHAT INARUNNINGBUSINESS 4 CERTAINAMOUNTOFVARIATIONINEXPENDITUREISBOUND TOHAVEOCCURRED DEPENDING UPONVARIOUSFACTORS.SIMPLY BECAUSEPAYM ENTSHAVEBEEN MADETOTHEWIFEOFTHEASSESSEEINFOUROFTHETRI PS ITDOESNOTPROVETHAT PAYMENTWASINANYWAYEXCESSIVE. 7. LD.DRSUPPORTEDTHEORDEROFAO.NONEWASPRESE NTONBEHALFOF THEASSESSEE. 8. WEHAVECONSIDEREDTHESUBMISSIONSOFLD.DRAND PERUSEDTHE MATERIALONRECORD.INOURCONSIDEREDVIEWTHEREIS NOCASEFORMAKING ANYINTERFERENCEINTHEORDEROFLD.CIT(A).THERE ASONSARETHATINRESPECT OFCARTINGEXPENDITUREAODIDNOTNOTICEANYIRREGU LARITIESANDBOOKS WERENOTREJECTEDBYHIM.ONTHEOTHERHANDSBOOKS AREAUDITEDUNDER SECTION44AB.THEREFORE THEREISNOREASONTODISA LLOWANYEXPENDITURE WITHOUTREJECTINGTHEBOOKS.FURTHERITISNOTICED THATALLTHEPARTIESARE TRADECREDITORSANDBALANCEOUTSTANDINGHAVEBEENC ONFIRMEDBYTHOSE PARTIES.THEASSESSEEHADBOOKEDTHEINCOMEANDWAS DISCLOSEDINTHE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. MERELY BECAUSE PAN IS NOT FURNISHED DISALLOWANCECANNOTBEMADEUNLESSPAYMENTISFOUND TOBEBOGUS.WE THEREFORE CONFIRMTHEORDEROFLD.CIT(A)ONTHIS GROUND. 9. SIMILARLYWECONFIRMTHEORDEROFLD.CIT(A)ON OTHERISSUEOF DISALLOWANCEUNDERSECTION40A(2)(B).THEREISONLY MARGINALVARIATION WHICHCANHAPPENINANYBUSINESS.ITISNOTPROVED THATPAYMENTSMADETO THE WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT GENUINE OR ARE NO T FOR BUSINESS CONSIDERATION.THEVARIATIONBEINGMARGINALNODISA LLOWANCEISCALLEDFOR. ASARESULTTHISGROUNDOFTHEREVENUEISALSODISM ISSED. 5 10. INTHERESULT APPEALFILEDBYTHEREVENUEISD ISMISSED. SD/- SD/- (T.K.SHARMA) (D.C.AGRAWAL) JUDICIALMEMBER ACCOUNTANTMEMBER AHMEDABAD DATED:31/05/2010 MAHATA/- COPYOFTHEORDERFORWARDEDTO :- 1.THEAPPELLANT. 2.THERESPONDENT. 3.THECIT(APPEALS)- 4.THECITCONCERNS. 5.THEDR ITAT AHMEDABAD 6.GUARDFILE. BYORDER DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT AHMEDABAD ORDERPRONOUNCEDINOPENCOURTON31/05/2010