Shri Punit Dinesh Bhatt, Vadodara V. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Vadodara

ITA 1319/AHD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7645 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 31-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SOMUGYAN PAL
• Assessee Lawyers: NIRMIT ME H TA
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, SMC IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO. 1319/AHD/2017 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14) PUNIT DINESH BHATT 30, DAULAT SOCIETY, GADAPURA VILLAGE, NEAR UTKARSH SCHOOL, RACE COURSE CIRCLE, VADODARA - 390007 / VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 4(1), AAYKAR BHAVAN, RACE COURSE CIRCLE, VADODARA - 390007 ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : ABPPB0841C ( APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : NIRMIT MEHTA, A.R. / RESPONDENT BY : SOMUGYAN PAL, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 06/02/2019 !'# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 25/04/2019 / O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX (APPEALS)-4, VADODARA (CIT(A) IN SHORT), DATED 24 .02.2017 ARISING IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 23.03.2015 PA SSED BY THE ITA NO. 1319/AHD/17 [PUNIT D. BHATT VS. DCIT] A.Y. 2013-14 - 2 - ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) UNDER S. 143(3) OF THE INCOM E TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT) CONCERNING AY 2013-14. 2. AT THE TIME OF SCRUTINY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR AY 2013- 14 IN QUESTION, IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE AO THAT THE ASSESSEE IS WORKING IN LIC OF INDIA AS DEVELOPMENT OFFICER AND HAS RECEIVED INCENTIVE TO THE TUNE OF RS.29,46,082/-. THE ASSES SEE OFFERED RS.20,62,257/- TO TAX AFTER CLAIMING EXPENSES OF RS .8,83,825/- @ 30% BEING PERMISSIBLE EXPENDITURE FOR EARNING INCEN TIVE. THE AO HOWEVER DISALLOWED THE EXPENSE AMOUNTING TO RS.8,83 ,825/- AND CLAIMED IN THE ABSENCE OF PROPER DETAILS. 3. THE CIT(A) IN FIRST APPEAL ALSO CONFIRMED THE AF ORESAID ACTION OF THE AO. 4. BEFORE US IN THE SECOND APPEAL, THE LEARNED AR F OR THE ASSESSEE REFERRED TO THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL I N ITS OWN CASE IN ITA NOS. 2141 & 2142/AHD/2014 CONCERNING AYS. 2007- 08 & 2009-10 ORDER DATED 27.10.2017 SUBMITTING THAT IN T HE IDENTICAL CIRCUMSTANCES, THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH HAS GRANTED RE LIEF TO THE ASSESSEE AND ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF EXPENSES BEING 30 % OF THE INCENTIVE BONUS AMOUNT. 5. THE LEARNED DR RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AUT HORITIES BELOW. 6. THE ISSUE TOWARDS ALLOWABILITY OF 30% OF INCENTI VE BONUS IN CONTROVERSY HAS ALREADY BEEN EXAMINED BY THE CO-ORD INATE BENCH IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN OTHER ASSESSMENT YEARS. THERE BEING ITA NO. 1319/AHD/17 [PUNIT D. BHATT VS. DCIT] A.Y. 2013-14 - 3 - DISSIMILARITY IN FACTS POINTED OUT ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE, WE ALLOW THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN PARITY WITH THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIR PRASAD) (PRADIP KUMA R KEDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 25/04/2019 TRUE COPY S. K. SINHA !'#' / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- &. / REVENUE 2. / ASSESSEE (. )*+ , / CONCERNED CIT 4. ,- / CIT (A) /. 012 33*+4 *+#4 56) / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 7. 289 : / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER / 4 /5 *+#4 56) THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 25/04/2019