Sri Raghunath Prasad, Asansol V. I.T.O, Ward-2(3)/ Asansol, Asansol

ITA 1035/KOL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4533 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 27-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 02-05-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: U K SARDAR CITS R
• Assessee Lawyers: R N RAM
• Keywords: Fair market value
• Section: 194C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH B, KO LKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SHRI N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM & SHRI M.B ALAGANESH, AM] ITA.1035/KOL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 SRI RAGHUNATH PRASAD -VERSUS- I.T.O., WARD 2(3) ASANSOL ASANSOL (PAN:AFAPP 5401 R) (APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT : SHRI R.N.RAM, AR FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI U.K.SARDAR, ADDL. CIT,S R.DR DATE OF HEARING : 27.05.2016. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08.07.2016. ORDER PER SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARISES OUT OF T HE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CITA IN APPEAL NO.309/CIT(A)/ASL/W-2(3)/ASL/11-12 DATED 07.03.2013 AGAINST THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT FRAMED FOR THE ASST YEAR 2009-10 U/S 143 (3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT). 2. THE FIRST ISSUE TO BE DECIDED IN THIS APPEAL IS AS TO WHETHER THE ADDITION COULD BE MADE IN THE SUM OF RS.5,86,305/- TOWARDS ACCRETION TO CAPITAL ACCOUNT. 2.1. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THIS ISSUE ARE THAT THE ASSSESSEE DEALS IN TRADING OF ELECTRONICS PRODUCTS AS A SUPER STOCKIEST OF M/S. BLUE STAR LTD , SHARP INDIA LTD & OTHERS UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE M/S. RAMSON TRADERS. APART FROM TRAD ING ACTIVITIES, THE ASSESSEE ALSO RUNS AUTHORIZED SERVICE CENTRE OF M/S. SHARP INDIA LTD., M/S. BLUE STAR LTD., M/S. HAIER LTD, M/S. CROMPTON GREAVES LTD ETC. DURING TH E COURSE OF HEARING THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED TAX AUDIT REPORT IN FORM NO. 3CB & 3CD DT D. 15.09.2009 IN RESPECT OF M/S. RAMSONS TRADERS ALONG WITH ITS ANNEXURES AND O THER PAPERS/ DOCUMENTS/ ITA NO.1035/KOL/2013 SRI RAGHUNATH PRASAD A.YR.2009-10 2 INFORMATION AS REQUISITIONED. ON PERUSAL OF THE BAL ANCE SHEET OF M/S. RAMSON TRADERS IT WAS OBSERVED THAT FRESH CAPITAL TO THE TUNE OF R S.5,86,305/- WAS INTRODUCED DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. ACCORDINGLY THE ASSES SEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF FRESH CAPITAL. THE LD. AO NOT CONVINCED WITH THE REPLY GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.5,86,305/- TOWARDS FRESH CAP ITAL INTRODUCED FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. 2.2. THE LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THE LD.AO HAS M ADE EXHAUSTIVE COMPUTATION AND CLAIMED THAT THERE IS NO SURPLUS FUND AVAILABLE WIT H THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE ACCRETION TO HIS CAPITAL ACCOUNT. HE OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT POINTED OUT ANY SPECIFIC ERROR IN THE RECONSTRUCTED CAPITAL ACCOUNT PREPARED BY THE LD. AO. HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT SUBMIT ANY PROOF OF FILING A COMBINED PERSONAL AND BUSINESS FUND FLOW STATEMENT CONTAINING ALL THE TRA NSACTIONS AND ACCORDINGLY UPHELD THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. AO. AGGRIEVED THE ASSE SSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND :- 1) THAT ON THE FACT & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE ID . CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 5,86,305 BEING CAPITAL ACCRETION OF PROPRIETOR ON THE GROUND THAT THE SAME WAS NOT PROPERLY EXPLAINED WHERE AS DETAILS OF EXPLANATION WAS FILED BEFORE THE AO AND CIT (A) THAT THERE WAS NO CAPITAL INTRODUCTI ON FROM UNEXPLAINED SOURCES. 2.3. THE LD. AR DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE LEDGER OF CURRENT ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PERIOD 01.04.2008 TO 31.03.2009; LOAN ACCOU NT OF DENA BANK AGAINST FDR AND NATIONAL SAVINGS CERTIFICATE TOGETHER WITH DETAILS OF PERSONAL DRAWINGS VIDE PAGES 57 TO 60 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND ARGUED THAT THESE PAPER S WERE NOT PROPERLY CONSIDERED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND ACCORDINGLY PRAYED FOR SE TTING AIDE OF THIS ISSUE TO THE LD. AO. IN RESPONSE TO THIS THE LD. DR VEHEMENTLY SUPPO RTED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 2.4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PE RUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD INCLUDING THE PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE ASSESS EE. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE DEEM IT FIT AND APPROPRIATE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY, TO SET ASIDE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE LD.AO TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITA NO.1035/KOL/2013 SRI RAGHUNATH PRASAD A.YR.2009-10 3 LAW, BASED ON THE AFORESAID DOCUMENTS RELIED UPON B Y THE LEARNED AR. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO AT LIBERTY TO FILE FRESH EVIDENCES IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTIONS. ACCORDINGLY GROUND NO.1 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTI CAL PURPOSES. 3. THE NEXT ISSUE TO BE DECIDED IN THIS APPEAL IS AS TO WHETHER THE ADDITION IN THE SUM OF RS.1,42,145/- COULD BE MADE TOWARDS DIFFERENCE I N THE BALANCE OF SUNDRY CREDITOR I.E. M/S.HAIER APPLIANCES (P) LTD. 3.1. THE LD.AO OBTAINED INFORMATION U/S 133 (6) OF THE ACT FROM THE SUNDRY CREDITOR M/S. HAIER APPLIANCES PVT. LTD AND FOUND THAT THERE IS A DIFFERENCE IN THE BALANCE TO THE TUNE OF RS.1,42,145/-. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED T HE DIFFERENCE AS BELOW :- REGARDING DIFFERENCE ON ACCOUNT OF M/S. HAIER APPL IANCES PVT. LTD THE ASSESSEE VIDE WRITTEN EXPLANATION DATED 22.,11.2011 SUBMITTED TH AT THE ASSESSEE HAS CREDITED RS.1,38,905/- AS SERVICE CHARGES, RS.3,200/- AS REIMBURSEMENT TOWARDS ADVERTISEMENT EXPENSES AND RS .50,001/- TOWARDS REIMBURSEMENT OF OTHER EXPENSES. FURTHER BILLS FOR SERVICE CHARGE S RAISED AND SETTLED AFTER MARCH, 2009 WERE RS.27,951/- AND RS.22,500/-. SO THESE WERE ACC OUNTED FOR IN THE NEXT FINANCIAL YEAR. MOREOVER, FOR THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.38,493/- NO BILL WAS RAISED BECAUSE THE COMPANY HAS DISPUTED IT AND THE COMPANY HAS NOT PAI D THESE BILLS TILL DATE. 3.2. THE LD. AO OBSERVED THAT THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT TENABLE AT ALL BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING FACTS :- (I) M/S. HAIER APPLIANCES PAID THE AMOUNT TO THE AS SESSEE AFTER DEDUCTING NECESSARY TAXES UNDER SECTION 194C OF THE I.T. ACT, THUS THE QUESTION OF REIMBURSEMENT OF PAYMENT DID NOT ARISE. (IL) CLAUSE 11 (A) OF FORM NO.3CB IN THE TAX AUDIT REPORT IT WAS CLEARLY MENTIONED THAT THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING EMPLOYED BY THE ASSES SEE WAS 'MERCANTILE SYSTEM'. (III) THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO EXPLAIN AS TO HOW M/S. HAIER APPLIANCES PVT. LTD. CREDITED THE PAYMENT TO THE ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE IN RESPE CT OF SERVICES CHARGES BEFORE MARCH 2009 THE BILLS OF WHICH AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE RAISED & SETTLED AFTER MARCH 2009. ITA NO.1035/KOL/2013 SRI RAGHUNATH PRASAD A.YR.2009-10 4 3.3. BASED ON THE ABOVE THE LD. AO MADE AN ADDITI ON OF RS.1,42,145/- IN THE ASSESSMENT WHICH WAS UPHELD BY THE LD. CIT(A). AGGR IEVED THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND :- 2) THAT ON THE FACT & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE ID . CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,42,145 MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFI CER ON THE GROUND THAT THERE WAS DIFFERENCE OF AMOUNT DEBITED BY M/S HAIER APPLIANCE S (P) LTD. & AMOUNT CREDITED BY THE ASSESSEE WHERE AS THE DIFFERENCE WAS FULLY RECO NCILED & STATEMENT WAS FURNISHED BEFORE THE A/O & CIT (A) IN COURSE OF ASSESSMENT & HEARING STAGE. 3.4. THE LD. AR DREW OUR ATTENTION TO PAGES 67 TO 70 OF PAPER BOOK CONTAINING THE LEDGER ACCOUNT OF THE CONCERNED SUNDRY CREDITOR M/S . HAIER APPLIANCES PVT. LTD FOR THE PERIOD 01.04.2008 TO 31.03.2009; 01.04.2009 TO 31.03.2010 AND MONTH-WISE DETAILS OF BILLS RAISED, AMOUNTS SETTLED ETC AND ST ATED THAT THE DETAILS FILED WERE NOT PROPERLY APPRECIATED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND A CCORDINGLY PRAYED FOR SETTING ASIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF LD. AO. IN RESPONSE TO THI S, THE LD. DR ARGUED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT BOTHER TO FILE THE RECONCILIATION STATEMENT BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 3.5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERU SED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD INCLUDING THE PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE ASSESS EE IN THIS REGARD. WE FEEL THAT, IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ISSUE NEEDS TO BE EXAMINED BY THE LD. AO IN THE LIGHT OF THE EVIDENCES AVAILABLE IN THE PAPE R BOOK FILED BY ASSESSEE AND ACCORDINGLY, DEEM IT FIT AND APPROPRIATE, TO SET AS IDE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF LD. AO, FOR DE NOVO ADJUDICATION. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRE CTED TO SUBMIT THE RECONCILIATION STATEMENT BEFORE LD. AO. ACCORDINGLY GROUND NO.2 RA ISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4. THE NEXT ISSUE TO BE DECIDED IN THIS APPEAL I S AS TO WHETHER THE LD. AO IS JUSTIFIED IN MAKING ADDITION TOWARDS FOREIGN TRIP EXPENSES AM OUNTING TO RS.1,50,000/- IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 4.1. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THE LD. AR ST ATED THAT THE ISSUE IS NOT PRESSED BY HIM AND THE SAME IS TAKEN AS A STATEMENT FROM THE B AR. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO.3 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. ITA NO.1035/KOL/2013 SRI RAGHUNATH PRASAD A.YR.2009-10 5 5. THE NEXT ISSUE TO BE DECIDED IN THIS APPEAL IS AS TO WHETHER DISALLOWANCE U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT COULD BE MADE IN THE SUM OF RS .1,10,719/- IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 5.1. IN THE P&L ACCOUNT AN AMOUNT OF RS.1.10,719/ - WAS FOUND DEBITED UNDER THE HEAD TOUR EXPENSES OF CUSTOMERS '. ON SPECIFIC QU ERY FROM THE LEARNED AO, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT HE HAD FINANCED A TRIP TO S UNDERBANS FOR ITS CUSTOMERS AS A PART OF ITS BUSINESS PROMOTIONAL SCHEME. FOR ARRANGING T HAT SUNDERBANS TRIP, THE ASSESSEE PAID AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,10,719/- TO M/S. MAKE MY TRI P (INDIA) PVT. LTD. A COPY OF INVOICE DATED 03.03.2009 ISSUED BY M/S. MAKE MY TRI P (INDIA) PVT. LTD WAS ALSO PRODUCED IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM. ON GOING THROUGH THE NARRATION OF THE INVOICE DTD. 03.03.2009, IT WAS OBSERVED THAT M/S. MAKE MY TRIP (INDIA) PVT. LTD HAD RAISED THE BILL IN FAVOUR OF M/S. RAMSON TRADERS FOR ARRANGING A PACKAGE TOUR COST FOR 30 PERSONS AT SUNDERBANS TIGER VIEW POINT FROM 25.02.2009 TO 2 7.02.2009. IT WAS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT BEFORE CONDUCTING THE SAID PACKAGE TO UR M/S. MAKE MY TRIP (INDIA) PVT. LTD HAD RECEIVED AN ADVANCE OF RS.80,000/- FROM M/ S. RAMSON TRADERS AND RAISED THE INVOICE FOR REST OF THE BILL AMOUNT RS. 30,719/-. O N PERUSAL OF THE BANK STATEMENT, IT WAS OBSERVED THAT M/S.RAMSON TRADERS HAD PAID THE B ALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.30,719/- VIDE CHEQUE NO. 171765 WHICH WAS CLEARED FROM HIS B ANK ACCOUNT ON 17.03.2009. CONSIDERING THE NARRATION OF THE INVOICE AS WELL AS THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT M/S. RAMSON TRADERS HAD ENTERED INTO A CONTRACT WITH M/S. MAKE MY TRIP (INDIA) PVT. LTD F OR ARRANGING A TRIP TO SUNDERBANS FOR THE PERIOD 25 .02.2009 TO 27.02.2009 ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND AFTER RECEIVING ADVANCE, M/S. MAKE MY TRIP (INDIA) PVT. LTD EXECUTED THE ASSIGNED JOB FOR WHICH IT RECEIVED NECESSARY PAYMENTS. AS SUCH THE PAYMENTS MADE TO M/S. MAKE MY TRIP (INDIA) PVT. LTD WAS NOTHING BUT A PAYMENT OF CONTRACTUAL NATURE AND AS SUCH THE ASSESSEE WAS BOUND TO DEDUCT TAX AT THE TIME OF CREDITING THE PAYMENT TO THE ACCOUNT OF M/S. MAKE MY TRIP (LNDIA) PVT. LTD, AS THE QUANTUM OF PAYMENT EXCEEDS THE STATUTORY LIMIT. BUT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO DEDUCT ANY TAX AT THE TIME OF C REDITING THE PAYMENT. ITA NO.1035/KOL/2013 SRI RAGHUNATH PRASAD A.YR.2009-10 6 5.2. THE LD. AO ACCORDINGLY MADE DISALLOWANCE U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT WHICH WAS UPHELD BY THE LD. CIT(A). AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND :- 4) THAT ON THE FACT & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE ID . CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,10,719 MADE BY A/O U/S 40(A)(IA) PAID TO MLS MAKE MY TRIP (INDIA) LTD TO ARRANGE TRIP TO 30 CUSTOMERS TO SUNDARBANS A S A PACKAGE TOUR WHERE AS PROVISIONS CONTAINED U/S 194C IS NOT APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT & AS SUCH DISALLOWANCE VIS 40 (A)(IA) IS UNCALLED FOR. 5.3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PER USED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD INCLUDING THE PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE ASSESS EE IN THIS REGARD. THE FACTS STATED HEREIN ABOVE REMAIN UNDISPUTED AND HENCE THE SAME A RE NOT REITERATED FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY. WE FIND THAT THE EXPENSES INCURRED IS ONLY TOWARDS PROMOTION OF BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE AND DOES NOT FALL UNDER THE DEFINITION OF WORK AS DEFINED IN 194C OF THE ACT. HENCE THERE IS NO OBLIGATION TO DEDUCT TAX AT SOURCE IN TERMS OF SECTION 194C OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY WE DIRECT THE LD. AO TO DELETE THE DISALLOWANCE MADE U/.S 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT. HENCE GROUND NO.4 RAISED BY T HE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 6. THE NEXT ISSUE TO BE DECIDED IN THIS APPEAL I S AS TO WHETHER ADDITION OF RS.89,513/- COULD BE MADE TOWARDS NOTIONAL RENTAL INCOME FROM H OUSE PROPERTY IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 6.1. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THIS ISSUE IS THAT THE L D. AO FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED LOSS UNDER THE HEAD HOUSE PROPERTY AND A SKED THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE DETAILS OF VARIOUS PROPERTIES USED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE REPLIED AS BELOW :- IN COMPLIANCE, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT- 'THE ASSESSEE HAS THREE HOUSE PROPERTIES OUT OF THA T TWO AT GURUNANAK COMPLEX, G. T. ROAD, ASANSOL AND ANOTHER ONE AT HILL VIEW PARK, AS ANSOL. OUT OF THREE PROPERTIES TWO IS BEING USED FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSE AND ONE FOR B USINESS PURPOSE. NO HOUSE PROPERTY HAS EVER BEEN LET OUT SO THERE DO ES NOT ARISE ANY QUESTION OF RENTAL INCOME.' THE AXIS BANK AUTHORITY , FROM WHICH THE ASSESSEE H AD TAKEN HOUSE BUILDING LOAN BEARING LOAN A/C. NO. PH 2130100097590 , ALSO CONFI RMED THAT THE HOUSING LOAN HAD BEEN GRANTED FOR FLAT NO. 1, FIRST FLOOR, GURUNANAK COMPLEX, ASANSOL HAVING COVERED AREA OF 2335 SQFT. FURTHER FROM THE VARIOUS RECORD S OF THE ASSESSEE VIZ BANK RECORD, ITA NO.1035/KOL/2013 SRI RAGHUNATH PRASAD A.YR.2009-10 7 INFORMATION FROM PURCHASE DEED OF PROPERTIES AT G'U RUNANAK COMPLEX ETC., IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE DECLARED THE HOUSE PROPE RTY AT HILL PARK, ASANSOL AS HIS RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE IT WAS I NFERRED THAT OUT OF THREE HOUSE PROPERTIES, TWO PROPERTIES WERE USED FOR SELF OCCUP ATION AND OTHER FOR BUSINESS USE. AS THE ASSESSEE RESIDES WITH HIS FAMILY AT HILL VIE W PARK, ASANSOL, THE SAID PROPERTY IS TREATED AS SELF OCCUPIED AND ANNUAL VALUE OF TH AT PROPERTY IS TAKEN AS 'NIL' AND THE FLAT NO.1, OF. 1ST FLOOR, GURUNANAK COMPLEX, G.T. R OAD, ASANSOL IS TREATED AS IF THE PROPERTY HAD BEEN LET OUT DURING THE ENTIRE PREVIO US YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. 6.2. THE LD. AO ESTIMATED THE RENT FOR THE PROPER TY AT RS.16,000/- PER MONTH BASED ON THE FAIR MARKET RENT PREVAILING IN THE SAID LOC ALITY AND DETERMINED THE INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY AT RS.89,513/- AFTER GIVING STATUTOR Y DEDUCTIONS AS PER THE ACT. THIS ADDITION WAS UPHELD BY LD. CIT(A). AGGRIEVED THE A SSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND :- 5) THAT ON THE FACT & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE LE T. CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS 89,513 MADE BY THE A/O ON ACCOUNT OF NOTIONAL INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPRIETY U/S 23 WHERE AS BOTH THE PRINCIPLE & QUAN TUM WERE DISPUTED BEFORE THE A/O & ALSO BEFORE THE CIT (A). 6.3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PER USED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD INCLUDING THE PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE ASSESS EE IN THIS REGARD. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS GOT THREE PROPERTIES OUT OF WHICH ONE IS USED FOR SELF OCCUPATION, ONE IS USED FOR BUSINESS PURPOSE AND THE OTHER IS CLAIMED TO BE USED PARTLY FOR BUSINESS AND PARTLY FOR RESIDENCE. THE LD. AO HAD RIGHTLY DETERM INED THE FAIR MARKET VALUE IN RESPECT OF THE SAID PROPERTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT DISPUTED THE DETERMINATION OF THE QUANTUM OF FAIR MARKET RENT IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTIES EITHER BEFORE US OR BEFOR E THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. WE FIND THAT THE REVENUE IS JUSTIFIED IN MAKING THIS ADDITION WH ICH IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. HENCE WE DO NOT FIND ANY REA SON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO.5 RAI SED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ITA NO.1035/KOL/2013 SRI RAGHUNATH PRASAD A.YR.2009-10 8 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 08.07.2016. SD/- SD/- [N.V.VASUDEVAN] [M.BALAGANESH] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE: 08.07.2016. R.G.(.P.S.) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. SRI RAGHUNATH PRASAD, RAMBANDHU TALAW, G.T.ROAD, ASAMSOL-713303. 2 THE I.T.O., WARD-2(3), ASANSOL. 3. THE CIT-ASANSOL.. 4. THE CIT(A)-AS ANSOL. 5. DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, DEPUTY /ASST. REGISTRAR , ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES