DCIT, Ranchi V. Smt. Shobha Mookherjee, Kolkata

ITA 108/RAN/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 85431 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 6 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-11-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 29-04-2010
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DEEPAK ROSHAN SR S C LD
• Keywords: Unexplained investment

Judgement Text

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CIRCUIT BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI H.L. KARWA, PRESIDENT , AND HON'BLE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT M EMBER ITA NO S . 108,109 & 110 /RAN/201 0 A.Y S 2004 - 05, 05 - 06 & 06 - 07 D .C.I.T, C. C - 1, R ANCHI VS. SMT. S H OBHA MOOKHERJEE PROP: M/S. MOOKERJEE WINE STORES PAN: A FDPM0835M ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) FOR THE APPELLANT :SH RI DEEPAK ROSHAN, SR. S.C, LD.DR FOR THE RESPONDENT : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 24 - 11 - 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 24 - 11 - 201 4 ORDER SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT M EMBER : ALL THESE THREE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE COMMON OR DER DATED 2 7 - 01 - 2010 PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) , RANCHI (JHARKHAND) AND THEY RELATE TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2004 - 05, 05 - 06 & 06 - 07 RESPECTIVELY . SINCE IDENTICAL ISSUES ARE INVOLVED IN ALL THESE THREE APPEALS, THEY WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND BEING DISPOSE OF BY THI S COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. NONE APP EARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, EVEN THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAD SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT ON THE EARLIER OCCASIONS . WE FURTHER NOTICE THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS ALSO SERV ED THROUGH THE LD.DR . HENCE, W E PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL S, EX - PARE WITHOUT PRESENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD.DR AND PERUSED THE RECORD . THE FACTS ARE THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED CREDIT FOR TCS [TAX COLLECTED AT SOURCE] IN THE RETURN S OF INCOME FILED IN ALL THE YE ARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. UNDER THE INCOME - TAX ACT, THE TCS IS COLLECTED BY A SUPPLIER OF LIQUOR U/S. 206C OF THE ACT . THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT DECLARE THE PURCHASES SHOWN IN THE TCS 2 ITA NO. 108,109 &110/RANCHI/10 - AM SM T. S H OBHA MOOKERJEE CERTIFICATES. ACCORDINGLY, T HE ASSESSING OFFICER ASSESSED THE VALUE OF PURCHASE S AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE LD. CIT(A) NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ACTED AS COMMISSION AGENT IN RESPECT OF PURCHASE OF LIQUOR BY A COMPANY NAMED M/ S. BINOSHIBA LIQUORS (P) LTD . THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED THE COMMISSION INCOME IN ALL THE THREE YEARS. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO PROVED THAT THE PURCHASE S SH OWN IN THE TCS CERTIFICATES WERE DULY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS OF M/S. BINOSHIBA LIQUORS (P) LTD. ON THE SE SET OF FACTS , THE LD.CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION S MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS UNACCOUNTED PURCHASES. 5. THE LD.DR DID NOT DISPUTE THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED HER COMMISSION INCOME IN AL L THE THREE YEARS. HE ALSO DID NOT DISPUTE THAT M/S. BINOSHIBA LIQUORS (P) LTD. HAD ACCOUNTED FOR THE PURCHASES SHOWN IN THE TCS CERTIFICATES. THE LD.DR , HOWEVER, POIN T ED OUT THAT M/S. BINOSHIBA LIQUORS (P) LTD. HAS ALSO SOLD THE GOODS TO THE RETAI L CONCERN OWNED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE NAME M/S . MOOKERJEE WINE STORES. HOWEVER, WE NOTICE THAT THE LD.CIT(A) H A S OBSERVED T HAT THE SUPPLY OF GOODS BY M/S. BINOSHIBA LIQUORS (P) LTD. TO THE CONCERN OWNED BY THE ASSESSEE IS A SEPARATE TRANSACTION NOT C ONNECTED WITH THE AGENCY AGREEMENT AND ACCORDINGLY DISAGREED WITH THE VIEW OF THE AO ON THIS POINT . W E ALSO AGREE WITH THE SAID VIEW TAKEN BY THE LD.CIT(A) . WE FURTHER NOTICE THAT THE LD CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION ON APPRECIATION OF THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE, WHICH ARE EXTRACTED SUPRA AND ACCORDINGLY WE HOLD THAT THE VALUE OF IMPUGNED PURCHASES COULD NOT BE ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE . 6. HOWEVER, THE LD.DR HAS ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THE TCS AMOUNT WITHOUT OFFERING THE SAME AS HER INCOME. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALLOWED THE CLAIM, SINCE HE HAD ASSESSED THE PURCHASES AS THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ABOVE SAID POINT REQUIRES VERIFICATION AT THE END OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. WE FIND MERIT IN THE SAID 3 ITA NO. 108,109 &110/RANCHI/10 - AM SM T. S H OBHA MOOKERJEE SUBMISSION OF THE LD.DR . HOWEVER , THE SAID CLAIM REQUIRES VERIFICATION AT THE END OF THE AO . ACCORDINGLY, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE DIRECTION TO EXAMINE AS TO W HETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS OFFERED THE TCS AMOUNT AS HER INCOME AND TAKE APPROPRIATE DECISION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 7 . IN THE RESULT, ALL THE THREE APPEAL S FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE TREATED AS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24 - 11 - 2014 SD/ - SD/ - [ H.L. KARWA ] [ B.R. BASKARAN ] PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE: 24.11.2014 PLACE : RANCHI PP, SR. PS COPY O F THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT : DCIT , C.C - 1, 7TH FL, MAHABIR TOWER, MAIN ROAD, RANCHI 2 THE RESPONDENT: SMT. SHOBHA MOOKERJEE PROP: M/S. MOOKERJEE WINE STORES, 21/1 JAWAHARLAL NEHRU ROAD, KOLKATA 3. .THE CIT, 4.THE CIT(A), 5.DR, ITAT CIRC UIT BENCH, RANCHI 6. GUARD FILE. TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, ASSTT. REGISTRAR 4 ITA NO. 108,109 &110/RANCHI/10 - AM SM T. S H OBHA MOOKERJEE 1. DATE OF DICTATION ............. 24 - 11 - 2014 ....................... 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS P LACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER ........................OTHER MEMBER ....... 2 6 - 11 - 2014 ........................ 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P.S./P.S. ..................... 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTA TING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT................... 24 - 11 - 2014 .................................................................. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. P.S./P.S ................ 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK . ...................................... 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ......................................... 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER ..................................... ............................................................ 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER ..............................................................