RAMU RAM JAKHAR, Kishangarh V. ITO, Kishangarh

ITA 110/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5235 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 08-02-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: O P BHATEJA CIT DR DHK
• Keywords: Assessment record
• Section: 234B

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH HKKXPUN] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 110/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 SHRI RAMU RAM JAKHAR S/O SHRI PARASRAM JAKHAR MADANGANJ, KISHANGARH CUKE VS. THE ITO KISHANGARH LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: AANPA 8940 Q VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : NONE (WRITTEN SUBMISSION) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY:SHRI O.P. BHATEJA, ADDL.CIT - DR LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 16/06/2016 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17 /06/2016 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER BHAGCHAND, AM THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), AJMER DATED 3-11-2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 RAISING THEREIN FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE LD. CIT(A) AJMER DID NOT JUSTIFY IN PASSING THE ORDER A S NONE ATTENDED WHEREAS ASSESSEE APPLIED FOR ADJOURNMENT ON THE GRO UND THAT HE DID NOT RECEIVE COPY OF ORDER SHEET BUT LD. APPELLATE A UTHORITY DID NOT CONSIDER IT. ITA NO. 110/JP/2016 SHRI RAMU RAM JAKHAR , MADANGANJ, KISHANGARH VS. I TO, KISHANGARH . 2 2. THAT WITHOUT ANY PREJUDICE TO THE AFORESAID GROU ND OF APPEAL, THE APPELLANT APPEALS AS FOLLOWS: (I) THAT ON THE FACT AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A), AJMER DID NOT JUSTIFY IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS. 8,65,918/- (II) THAT LD. CIT(A) AJMER DID NOT CONSIDER THE FAC T THAT ASSESSEE DID NOT PROVIDE COPY OF TRANSACTION O F RS. 86,59,083/- ON WHICH BASIS ADDITION OF RS. 8,65,918 /- WAS MADE (III) THAT ON THE FACT AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE AO DID NOT JUSTIFY IN CHARGING INTEREST OF RS. 8,740/- AND RS. 61,180/- U/S 234A AND 234B OF THE I.T. ACT, 196 1 RESPECTIVELY. (IV) THE AS ASSESSEE DID NOT PROVIDE COP OF TRANSACTION OF RS. 86,59,083/-, HENCE INITIATED PRO CEEDINGS FOR VIOLATION OF SECTION 44AB AND PENALTY NOTICE U/ S 271(1)(C ) R.W.S. 274 AND PENALTY U/S 271B IS NOT J USTIFIABLE. 2.1 APROPOS GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE, IT I S OBSERVED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE ORDER BY CONFIRMING THE A CTION OF THE AO. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF LD. CIT(A)S ORDER IS REPRODUCE D AS UNDER:- 4.1 THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RELATE TO ADDITION OF RS. 8,65,918/- BEING AMOUNT OF PROFIT COMPUTED BY THE A O ON THE TURNOVER OF RS. 86,59,083/-. FROM THE ASSESSMENT O RDER, IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE VIDE NOTE SHEET DATED 05-02-2014 AGREED TO PAY TAXES ON 10% OF THE UNACCOUNTED SALES TO THE TUNE O F RS. 86,59,083/-.AS DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROC EEDINGS , THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF HAD AGREED TO PAY TAX ON THE PROFI T OF RS. ITA NO. 110/JP/2016 SHRI RAMU RAM JAKHAR , MADANGANJ, KISHANGARH VS. I TO, KISHANGARH . 3 8,65,918/- COMPUTED@ 10% ON THE TOTAL UNDISCLOSED T URNOVER OF RS. 86,59,083/-. THEREFORE, THE ADDITION MADE BY TH E AO IS HEREBY CONFIRMED 2.2 NONE ATTENDED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE DATE OF HEARING AND THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION FILED BY THE LD. AR OF THE A SSESSEE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED. 2.3 DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 2.4 I HAVE HEARD LD. DR AND CONSIDERED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE ALONGWITH ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. DR PRODUCED THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS WHEREIN ON 5-02-2014, THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF ATTENDED THE ASSESS MENT PROCEEDINGS ALONGWITH HIS ACCOUNTANT SHRI RAM SWAROOP SHARMA AN D THE ASSESSEE AGREED TO PAY THE DUE TAXES ON THE INCOME. CONSIDER ING THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE, PLEADINGS OF THE LD. DR AND THE FACTUAL ASPECTS OF THE CASE, I SUSTAIN THE ORDERS OF THE AU THORITIES BELOW WHEREIN ADDITION OF RS. 8,65,918/- IS MADE ON THE TOTAL UND ISCLOSED TURNOVER OF RS. 86,59,083/-. THE AMOUNT OF RS. 86,59,083/- WAS UNACCOUNTED SALES ON WHICH 10% INCOME WAS CALCULATED AND THE ASSESSEE AG REED TO PAY THE DUE TAXES. HENCE, IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, I FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF ITA NO. 110/JP/2016 SHRI RAMU RAM JAKHAR , MADANGANJ, KISHANGARH VS. I TO, KISHANGARH . 4 THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH IS SUSTAINED. THUS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 3.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DI SMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17 /06/2 016 SD/- HKKXPUN ( BHAGCHAND) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 17 /06/ 2016 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT-SHRI RAMU RAM JAKHAR, MADANGANJ, KISHANGARH 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO, WARD- KISHANGARH 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 110/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR