Shivsharan C. Khedgi, Solapur V. Income-tax Officer,

ITA 134/PUN/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 13424514 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-01-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 21-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B C MALAKAR
• Section: 40A(3); 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.134/PN/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) SHRI SHIVSHARAN C. KHEDGI, SIDHIVINAYAK OIL MILL, BASAVESHWAR MARKET YARD, AKKALKOT, DIST. SOLAPUR. PAN : ABHPK2853M . APPELLANT VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3), SOLAPUR. . RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : MR. B. C. MALAKAR DATE OF HEARING : 05-01-2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21-01-2015 ORDER PER G. S. PANNU, AM THE CAPTIONED APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AG AINST AN ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-III, PUNE DATED 11.11.2013 WHICH, IN TURN, HAS ARISEN FROM AN ORDER DATED 30.12.2009 PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED AND NOR AN Y ADJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT-ASSESSEE INSPITE OF NOTICE HAVING BEEN SERVED THROUGH RPAD ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION AND T HE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT -REVENUE. THEREFORE, HAVING REGARD TO THE RULE 24 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBU NAL RULES, 1963, THE APPEAL IS BEING DISPOSED-OFF AFTER HEARING THE RESPONDENT ON MERITS AND EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE-APPELLANT. ITA NO.134/PN/2014 3. THE ONLY ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL IS WITH REGARD TO THE ACTION OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES IN MAKING A DISALLOWANCE OF RS.26,67,87 2/- ON THE GROUND THAT THE PAYMENTS WERE IN CONTRAVENTION OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT. 4. FROM THE DISCUSSION IN THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORIT IES BELOW, IT IS SEEN THAT ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED CERTAIN EXPENDITURE BY MAKING CASH PAYMENTS WHICH ARE HIT BY THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT. THE DISCUSSION MADE BY THE CIT(A) REFLECTS THAT THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE PROD UCED BY THE ASSESSEE TO SAY THAT THE RECIPIENT INSISTED ON CASH PAYMENT OR THAT THE EXPENSES HAVE INCURRED THROUGH AGENTS SO AS TO COME WITHIN THE MI TIGATING PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT READ WITH RULE 6DD(J) OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE BEFORE US, WE FIND N O REASONS TO DEVIATE FROM WHAT HAS BEEN DEDUCED BY THE CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, WE HEREBY AFFIRM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND ASSESSEE FAILS IN HIS APPEA L. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 ST JANUARY, 2015. SD/- SD/- (R.S. PADVEKAR) (G.S. PANNU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE, DATED: 21 ST JANUARY, 2015. SUJEET COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : - 1) THE ASSESSEE; 2) THE DEPARTMENT; 3) THE CIT(A)-III, PUNE; 4) THE CIT-III, PUNE; 5) THE DR B BENCH, I.T.A.T., PUNE; 6) GUARD FILE. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., PUNE