Sumiya , Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(4), Hyderabad

ITA 1287/Hyd/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0763 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Next Hearing Date: 16-10-2019
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 16-08-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJEEV BENJWAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 143(3); 147

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A - SMC, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1287/HYD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011 - 12 SMT. SUMIYA, HYDERABAD. PAN: BVFPS 8118 A VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 14(4), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SMT. S. SANDHYA, AR REVENUE BY: SRI RAJEEV BENJWAL, DR DATE OF HEARING: 16/10/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 20 /1 2 /2019 ORDER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 6, HYDERABAD IN APPEAL NO. 10720/2018 - 19/B2/CIT(A) - 6, DATED 12/6/2016 PASSED U/S. 143(3) R.W.S 147 & U/S. 250(6) OF THE ACT FOR THE A.Y. 2011 - 12. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWIN G GROUNDS IN HER APPEAL: - 1. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS TO THE EXTENT IT I S PREJUDICIAL TO THE APPELLANT. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE APPELLANT THOUGH SUCH ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IS RELEVANT FOR COMPLETION OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 2 3. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 6,71,000/ - OUT OF RS. 9,71,000/ - MADE BY THE A.O. WITHOUT PROPERLY CONSIDERING THE DETAILS. 4. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL GROUND THAT UNDER THE HEAD BUSINESS LOSS OF RS. 73,380/ - IS TO BE ADOPTED AND NOT THE INCOME OF RS. 1,42,040/ - . 5. ANY OTHER GROUND OR GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 3. A T THE OUTSET, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DESIRES TO WITHDRAW GRO UNDS NO. 2 AND 3. HOWEVER, PRESSED GROUND NO.4. THE ISSUE IN VOLVED IN THE GROUND NO.4 IS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DI SCLOSED BUSI NESS INCOME OF RS. 1,42,040/ - BEING 10% OF THE TU RNOVER OF RS. 14,20,400/ - FROM HER BUSINESS OF ERECTING FA L SE CEILING S . HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE H AD INCURRED A LOSS OF RS. 73,380 / - O N THE BUSINESS . SINCE THE ASSESSEE IN HER COMPUTATION H AS DI SCLOSED THE INCOME OF RS. 1, 42,040/ - AND NO EVIDENCE WAS SUBMITTED FOR INCURRING THE LOSS OF RS. 73,380/ - THE LD. CIT (A) REJECTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. 4 . BEFORE US, THE L D. AR REQUESTED FOR THE MAT TER TO BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. A O FOR VERIFICATION. T HE LD. DR STRONGLY OPPOSED TO THE SUBMISSION OF T HE ASSESSEE. AFTER PERUSING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND HEARING BOTH THE LD. AR AND THE LD DR AT LENGTH, WE DO NOT FIND MERIT IN THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE LD. AR. T HE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO NOT SUBMITTED ANY EVIDENCE BEFORE US TO SUGGEST THAT THE SHE H AD SUFFERED L OSS. THEREFORE, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT REMITTING BA CK THE MATTER TO THE 3 FILE OF THE LD. AO WILL ONLY BE A FUTILE EXERCISE . HENCE, THIS GRO UND R AISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DE VO ID OF MERITS. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS WITHDRAWN THE OTHER GROUNDS RAISED IN THE APPEAL AND THE GROUNDS NO.1 AND 5 ARE GENERAL IN NATURE , THE ENTIRE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS HELD AGAINST HER. 5 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED . PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20 TH DECEMBE R , 2019. SD / - ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 20 TH DECEM BER , 2019 OKK COPY TO: - 1) SMT. SUMIYA , H.NO. 8 - 1 - 332/3/B/23, LANE NO.20, ARVIND NAGAR COLONY, AZIZ BAGH, TOLICHOWKI, HYDERABAD. 2) INCOME TAX OFF I CER, WARD - 14(4), IT TOWERS, AC GUARDS, HYDERABAD. 3) THE CIT(A) - 6, HYDERABAD 4) THE PR. CIT - 6, HYDERABAD 5) THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6) GUARD FILE