Dushmanta Giri, Medinipur, Paschim Medinipur V. A.C.I.T., Cir-2, Medinipur,

ITA 1048/KOL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5594 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-09-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 16-06-2009
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P C NAYAK
• Assessee Lawyers: MIRAJ D SAHA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside

Judgement Text

, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : KOLKATA () BEFORE . . . . . . . . , , , , !, '# '# '# '# /AND . .. . . .. . , $ ! ) [BEFORE HONBLE SRI D. K. TYAGI, JM & HONBLE SRI C . D. RAO, AM] #% #% #% #% / I.T.A NO. 1048 /KOL/2009 &'( )* &'( )* &'( )* &'( )*/ // / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 DUSHMANTA GIRI, MEDINIPUR -VS- ASSISTANT COMMISS IONER OF INCOME-TAX, (PA NO.ADNPG 4883 B) CIRCLE-2, MEDINIPUR. (,- / APPELLANT ) (.,-/ RESPONDENT ) FOR THE APPELLANT : SRI MIRAJ D. SAHA FOR THE RESPONDENT SRI P. C. NAYAK / / ORDER PER D. K. TYAGI, JM ( . . . . . . . . , , , , ! ) THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAI NST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), KOLKATA DATED 20.03.2009 FOR ASSESSMENT YEA R 2005-06 ON THE GROUND OF CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCES MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER VARIOUS HEADS. 2. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE AS SESSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING INCOME OF RS.16,80,230/-. THE ASSESSING O FFICER COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT DETERMINING INCOME AT RS.22,80,040/- MAKING ESTIMAT ED DISALLOWANCES ON ACCOUNT OF VARIOUS EXPENSES CLAIMED UNDER VARIOUS HEADS AS THE ASSESEE DID NOT MAINTAIN SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE EXPENSES CL AIMED. IN APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITIONS IN RESPECT OF PRINTING & STAT IONERY AND TRAVELLING & CONVEYANCE TOTALING TO RS.41,108/- AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS IN RESPECT OF CARRIAGE INWARDS RS.1,37,875/-, WAGES & LABOUR CHARGES RS.9,32,235/- , SITE EXPENSES RS.65,794/-, OFFICE EXPENSES RS.31,115/-, LABOUR EXPENSES RS.54,658 AND SALARY RS.2,70,720/-. AGGRIEVED BY THE SAID ORDER, THE ASSESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL BE FORE US. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSE L FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT NET PROFIT SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF FIL ING OF RETURN WAS 2.07% BUT AFTER THE ADDITION SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH COMES TO 6.70% WHICH IS HIGHER THAN THE NET PROFIT OF 4.78% SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE DURING TH E IMMEDIATELY PREVIOUS YEAR. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT NET PROFIT SHOWN BY THE ASSE SSEE AT 2.07% WAS BECAUSE OF 2 EXCEPTIONAL EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE DURIN G THIS YEAR ON MACHINERY BURNT BY MAOIST MILITANTS OF RS.11,50,173/-. IF THESE EXPEN SES WERE NOT INCURRED BY THE ASSESEE THE ASSESSEES NET PROFIT WOULD HAVE COME TO 5.64% I.E. HIGHER THAN THE NET PROFIT SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE IMMEDIATE PREVIOUS YEAR. HE, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE RETURNED INCOME SHOWN BY THE ASSESEE MAY KINDLY BE ACCEPTED. 4. LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, RELIED ON THE ORDER O F THE LD. CIT(A). 5. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFUL LY PERUSING THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS SUSTAINE D THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AFTER MAKING COMPARISON OF THE EXPENSES INC URRED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE IMMEDIATE PRECEDING YEAR AND THE YEAR UNDER CONSID ERATION AND FOUND THAT THE EXPENSES WERE ABNORMALLY HIGH THIS YEAR AND NO SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION IN THIS REGARD WAS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, HE DELETED THE DISALLOWAN CES MADE ON ACCOUNT OF PRINTING & STATIONERY AND TRAVELLING AND CONVEYANCE BY OBSERVI NG THAT THE PERCENTAGE OF EXPENDITURE IS LESS THAN COMPARED TO THE IMMEDIATEL Y PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR. IF WE TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE SUSTENANCE OF THE DISALLOWA NCES ON ACCOUNT OF CARRIAGE INWARD, WAGES AND LABOUR CHARGES, SITE EXPENSES, OFFICE EXP ENSES, LABOUR EXPENSES AND SALARY IS ON HIGHER SIDE AS THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS HIMSELF HAS ACCEPTED THAT THE TURNOVER FOR THIS ASSESSMENT YEAR IS INCREASED BY 334.78% WHEN C OMPARED TO THE PREVIOUS YEAR TURNOVER AND SINCE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS HIMSELF OBSER VED THAT THE PERCENTAGE OF EXPENDITURE ON ACCOUNT OF PRINTING AND STATIONERY A ND TRAVELLING AND CONVEYANCE ARE LESS WHEN COMPARED TO THE PREVIOUS YEAR, IN OUR CONSIDER ED OPINION, THIS REQUIRES FRESH ADJUDICATION BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN VIEW OF THE SUBMI SSIONS MADE BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . 7. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30.9.10 SD/- SD/- . . , $ ! . . , ! (C. D. RAO) (D. K. TYAGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ( $ $ $ $) )) ) DATED :30TH SEPTEMBER, 2010 01 &'23 &4 JD.(SR.P.S.) 3 / 5 .&& 6)7- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . ,- / APPELLANT SRI DUSHMANTA GIRI, AT BACHURDOBA, PO JHARGRAM, DIST. PASCHIM MEDINIPUR, PIN-721 507. 2 .,- / RESPONDENT , ACIT, CIRCLE-2, MEDINIPUR . 3 . &/' / THE CIT, 4 . &/' ( )/ THE CIT(A), KOLKATA 5 . >& .&' / DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA .&/ TRUE COPY , /'?/ BY ORDER , @ #3 / DEPUTY REGISTRAR .