SHRI NANDKISHORE BHIKAMCHAND RATHI, V. ITO, WARD- 1, Akola

ITA 126/NAG/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9676 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 2 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-06-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 02-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 142(1); 40(a)(ia); 201(1); 143(1); 194A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNALNAGPUR BENCH, NAGPURBEFORE SH. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBERANDSH. YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.126/NAG/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13)Sh. NandkishoreBhikamchand RathiProp. of M/s Rathi KrushiCentre, Main RoadSangrampurDist: Buldana-444 202PAN: ACXPR 7791J(APPELLANT)Vs.Income Tax OfficerWard-1Murtizapur Road, Akola(RESPONDENT)ORDERPER YOGESH KUMAR US, JMThis appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of LearnedCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Nagpur, [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short],dated 16/12/2016 for Assessment Year 2012-13.2.The assesse has raised only sole ground of appeal:“1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A)erred in confirming addition of Rs.1,64,130/- made by the AO u/s 40(a)(ia)of Income Tax Act, 1961.2. Any other ground that may be raised at the time of hearing of theAppeal.Appellant bySh.ShantanuDeshmukh, CARespondent bySh. Vitthal M. Bhosale, Jt.CIT-DRDate of Hearing01.06.2022Date of Pronouncement07.06.20222 Nandkishore Bhikamachand Rathi vs. ITO3.On perusal of the order sheet, it is found that on previous two occasionsi.e., on 27/04/2022 and 01/06/2022, the assessee neither appeared in personnor represented by any Counsel. Today when the matter is called; anadjournment application has been moved by the Authorized Representative onthe ground that, the Senior Counsel appearing for the Assessee in the matter isout of station for a period of one month. On going through the appeal, otherrecords and looking into the issue involved therein, we deem it proper to denythe adjournment and to decide the appeal on merit on hearing the Ld. AR andthe Ld. Departmental Representative (“DR” for short).4.The brief facts of the case are that, the Assessee filed return of income on26/09/2012 declaring total income of Rs.12,94,686/- and the same wasprocessed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘theAct’). The case was selected for scrutiny. A fresh notice u/s 142(1) along withthe questionnaire was issued on 11.08.2014. In response to the notice, theassesse has been represented by his Authorized Representative in theassessment proceedings.5.The assessment order came to be passed on 31/12/2014 by disallowingan amount of Rs.5,18,596/- on the ground that the assesse has not followedthe provision of Section 194A r.w.s. 40(a)(ia) of Income Tax Act, 1961.6.Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 31.12.2014, the assesse haspreferred the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed theappeal on 14/12/2016 by sustaining the addition of Rs.1,64,130/-. Aggrieved3 Nandkishore Bhikamachand Rathi vs. ITOby the order dated 14/12/2016, the Assessee has preferred the present Appealon the grounds mentioned above.7.We have heard both the parties, perused the materials on record andgave our thoughtful consideration. The assessment order came to be passed bydisallowing sum of Rs.5,18,596/-. In the Appeal before the CIT (A), the Ld. CIT(A) while allowing the Appeal in part, confirmed an addition of Rs.1,64,130/- inthe case of one Smt. Kamlabai B. Rathi, who has paid interest of Rs.1,64,130/-on the ground that, the Assessee has not followed the provision u/s 194Ar.w.s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. The contention of the Assessee that, the said Smt.Kamlabai B. Rathi has filed her return of income on 29.03.2013 declaring totalincome of Rs.4,65,120/- and the Form No. 15G/15H has been received statingthat her income is below taxable limits, has been fund not been acceptable bythe Ld. CIT(A).8.We find both the CIT(A) and the AO have not examined as to whether ornot Smt. Kamalabai B. Rathi has taken into account of the income of interestreceived from the assessee of Rs.1,64,130/- while computing the income in herreturn filed on 29.03.2013 and whether she has paid the tax due on the incomedeclared by her in the return or not in terms of second proviso to Section 40(i))(ia) R/w first proviso to Section 201(1) of the Act.9. Therefore, we are inclined to remand the matter to the file of Ld. AO toexamine as to whether or not Smt. Kamalabai B. Rathi has taken into accountof the income of interest received from the assessee of Rs.1,64,130/- while4 Nandkishore Bhikamachand Rathi vs. ITOcomputing the income in her return filed on 29.03.2013 and has paid the taxdue on the income declared by her in the return, on examination of the same,the AO is directed to decide the issue in accordance with law.10. Accordingly, we allow the Assessee’s Grounds of Appeal for statisticalpurposes and remand the matter to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication interms of above discussion. Needless to state that, the Assessee shall beprovided with opportunity of being heard and to produce any documents insupport of the claim.11. In result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statisticalpurposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on this 7th Day of June, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 07.06.2012PK/SpsCopy forwarded to:1.Appellant2.Respondent3.CIT4.CIT(Appeals)5.DR: ITAT6. Guard FileTrue CopyBy Order Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur