Shri Alok Kodiyar, Karta of M/s Kodiyar Constructions, V. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax,

ITA 106/JAB/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 10622914 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 09-02-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 25-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHISHEKH SHUKLA
• Assessee Lawyers: AP SRIVASTAVA; SAPAN USRETHE
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 106/JAB/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 PAGE 1 OF 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR [CORAM: I C SUDHIR JM AND PRAMOD KUMAR AM] I.T.A. NO. 106/JAB/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 ALOK KHODIYAR, .APPELLANT KARTA OF M/S KHODIYAR CONSTRUCTION, SHAHDOL. [PAN:AADHK 0560 L] VS. ADD. C.I.T, RANGE, KATNI ...RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY: A.P. SRIVASTAVA & SAPAN USRETHE FOR THE APPELLANT ABHISHEKH SHUKLA FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING: 11 TH FEBRUARY, 2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER: 27 TH MARCH, 2015 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR: 1. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 13 TH SEPTEMBER, 2012 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN TH E MATTER OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX A CT, 1961, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. THE GRIEVANCES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS FOL LOWS : 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRM ING THE ADDITION OF RS.5,99,429 MADE BY THE AO ON ESTIMATE BASIS. I.T.A. NO. 106/JAB/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 PAGE 2 OF 4 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRM ING THE ADDITION WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WERE RE JECTED WITHOUT GIVING ANY COGENT REASON. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRM ING THE ADDITION BY NOT FOLLOWING HIS OWN ORDER IN THE CASE OF SISTER CONCE RN WHEREIN SIMILAR ADDITION BY THE AO WAS DELETED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A). IN VIE W OF JUDGMENT OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF PURBANCHAL CABLES & CO NDUCTORS (P) LTD VS. ASSAM SEB (2012) 7 SCC 462 WHEREIN SUPREME COURT AT PARAS 74-80 REITERATED THAT JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE DEMANDS THAT A DECISION OF A DIVISION BENCH OF TWO JUDGES SHOULD BE FOLLOWED BY ANOTHER DB OF T WO JUDGES AND THEREFORE JUDGMENT OF CIT(A) IN THE CASE OF SISTER CONCERN SH OULD HAVE BEEN FOLLOWED. 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE RELEVANT MATERIAL FACTS ARE LIKE THIS. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NO TICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED CERTAIN EXPENDITURE ON THE BASIS OF SELF M ADE VOUCHERS. WHEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO SHOW CAU SE AS TO WHY BOOK RESULTS NOT BE REJECTED AND PROFIT BE ESTIMATED, THE AUTHOR IZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT IN THE LINE OF BUSINESS OF ASSESSEE SUCH DISCREPANCY, I.E. SELF MADE VOUCHERS ARE INEVITABLE. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE SUFFERING FROM CANCER, WAS SERIOUSLY ILL, AND THEREFORE, HE C OULD NOT METICULOUSLY MAINTAIN SUPPORTING VOUCHERS AS THE ASSESSING OFFICER REQUIR ED TO SEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS URGED TO ACCEPT THE BOOK RESULTS. HOWEV ER, NONE OF THESE SUBMISSIONS IMPRESSED THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HE REJ ECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WITH HIS BRIEF OBSERVATION THAT AFTER CONSIDERING ALL FACTORS, BOOK RESULTS ARE REJECTED AND TAXABLE INCOME IS ESTIMATED AT 5% OF T URNOVER OF RS.2,90,95,676/- WHICH COMES TO RS.14,54,783/-. AGGRIEVED BY THE ST AND SO TAKEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) BUT WITHOUT ANY SUCCESS. I.T.A. NO. 106/JAB/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 PAGE 3 OF 4 4. THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SATISFIED AND IS IN APPEAL B EFORE US. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF T HE APPLICABLE LEGAL POSITION. 6. WE HAVE NOTED THAT THE ONLY REASON FOR REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IS THAT THE VOUCHERS PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE T HE ASSESSING OFFICER WERE SELF MADE VOUCHERS. THERE IS, HOWEVER, NO JUSTIFICA TION FOR THE RATE ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER EITHER. WE HAVE ALSO NOTED TH AT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALL ALONG CONTENDED THAT IN THE LINE OF BUSINESS ACTIVITIES T HAT THE ASSESSEE IS CARRYING OUT, I.E., CIVIL CONTRACT WORK, SUCH VOUCHERS ARE INEVIT ABLE IN THE SENSE THAT THESE PURCHASES ARE MADE FROM UNORGANIZED SECTOR AND NONE OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE REJECTED THIS EXPLANATION. THE BOOKS OF ACCOUN T AND THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DULY AUDITED AND NO O THER DEFECTS ARE POINTED IN THE SAME. WE HAVE ALSO NOTED THAT IN THE CASE OF AS SESSEES SISTER CONCERN, A SIMILAR ADHOC DISALLOWANCE OF RS.50,000/- WAS DELET ED BY THE CIT(A) AND THE REVENUE IS NOT IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IT IS ONLY ELEMENTARY THAT THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES CANNOT TAKE DIFFERENT STAND ON SUCH A BASIC ISSUE OF ACCEPTANCE OF SELF MADE VOUCHERS IN THE CASE OF ASS ESSEE. KEEPING IN VIEW ALL THE FACTORS AND ENTIRETY OF CASE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDE RED VIEW THAT THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ERRED IN REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ONLY ON THE BASIS THAT VOUCHERS IN RESPECT OF SOME OF THE PURCHASES WERE SELF MADE VOU CHERS. WE, THEREFORE, SET I.T.A. NO. 106/JAB/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 PAGE 4 OF 4 ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ON THIS P OINT AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ACCEPT THE BOOK RESULTS AS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL IS ALLOWED IN THE TERMS IN DICATED ABOVE. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON 27 TH MARCH, 2015. SD/- SD/- I C SUHDIR PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) DATED: THE 27 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2015 *AKS/- COPIES TO : (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR