Brijendra Kr. Kedia, Kolkata V. ITO, WD-30(2), KOLKATA, Kolkata

ITA 1368/KOL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9072 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-02-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 16-06-2014
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K L KANAK
• Assessee Lawyers: N O N E
• Keywords: Capital expenditure
• Section: 43B

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO . 1 3 68 / KOL ./201 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 8 - 20 0 9 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA SMC BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN , JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1 3 68 / KOL / 20 1 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 8 - 20 0 9 BRIJENDRA KUMAR KEDIA,............ ..... ..... ....... .... ............. .. .APP ELL ANT KEDIA HOUSE, P - 503, KEYATALA ROAD, KOLKATA - 700 029 [ PAN : A GCPK 9493 M ] - VS. - INCOME TAX OFFICER , ........................... ................... ... . RESPONDENT WARD - 30 ( 2 ), KOLKATA , 2, GARIAHAT ROAD, KOLKATA - 700 031 APPEARANCES BY: N O N E , FOR THE AS SESSEE S HRI K.L. KANAK , J CIT, SR. D.R., FOR THE DEPARTMENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : FEBRUARY 23 , 2 01 5 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : FEBRUARY 23 , 201 5 O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSE E AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - X IV , KOLKATA IN APPEAL NO. 365 / CIT(A) - X I V/10 - 11 D ATED 0 3 . 0 3 .201 4 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 8 - 0 9 . 2. NONE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND S HRI K.L. KANAK, JCIT, SR. D.R. REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REV ENUE. 3. IN THE ASSESSEE S APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: - (1) FOR THAT THE LD. CIT(A) - XIV HAS NOT ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF RS.68,554/ - TOWARDS PAYMENT OF VAT ON THE GROUND THAT THE SAID AMOUNT COULD NOT PAY DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09 AND ADDED BACK TO THE TOTAL INCOME. THE ADDITION OF THE SAID AMOUNT SHOULD BE DELETED IN FULL. I.T.A. NO . 1 3 68 / KOL ./201 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 8 - 20 0 9 PAGE 2 OF 3 (2) FOR THAT THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) - XIV HAS DISALLOWED CLAIM OF THE MEDICAL EXPENSES TO THE EXTENT OF RS.98,000/ - AND LOSS IN SALE OF CAR RS.10,000/ - WHICH SHOULD BE ALLOWED AS THE SAME IS MADE FOR WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE BUSINESS. 4 . IN RESPECT OF THE GROUND NO. 1, IT WAS THE SUBMISSION BY THE LD. SR. D.R. THAT THE ASSESESE HAD NOT PRODUCED THE CHALLAN FOR PAYMENT OF VAT TO AN EXTENT OF RS.68,554/ - . IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT CONSEQUENTLY UNDER THE BENEFIT OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 43B THE DISALLOWANCE WAS RIGHTLY MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS). 5. IN RESPECT OF THE GROUND NO. 2, IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD DISALLOWED RS.98,000/ - CLAIMED BY THE ASSESESE TOWARDS MEDICAL EXPENSES. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS AN INDIVIDUAL AND THE MEDICAL EXPENSES WERE INCURRED FOR HIMSELF. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE MEDICAL EXPENSES WERE PERSONAL EXPENSES AND THE SAME COULD NOT BE ALLOWED FOR COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS THE FURTHER SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD ALSO DISALLOWED RS.10,000/ - REPRESENTING THE LOSS ON SALE OF CAR. LD. SR. D.R. VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND LD. CIT(APPEALS). 6. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS. A PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD REQUESTED FOR TIME TO PRODUCE THE CHALLAN FOR THE PAYMENT OF THE VAT TO THE EXTENT OF RS.68,554/ - . THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ABLE TO PRODUCE THE EVIDENCES BECAUSE ADEQUATE TIME WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO HIM. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THIS ISSUE IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE - ADJUDICAT ION AFTER GRANTING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE CHALLAN FOR THE PAYMENT OF VAT TO THE EXTENT OF RS.68,554/ - . IF THE ASSESSEE IS UNABLE TO PRODUCE THE CHALLAN, ADMITTEDLY THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WOULD STAND. I.T.A. NO . 1 3 68 / KOL ./201 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 8 - 20 0 9 PAGE 3 OF 3 7. IN RESPECT OF THE GROUND NO. 2, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE MEDICAL EXPENSES OF RS.98,000/ - WAS REPRESENTING THE ADMISSION TO NURSING HOME, HOSPITAL F OR SUFFERING IN SUPERANNUATION DISEASE IN RESPECT OF THE ASSESSEE HIM SELF. AS THE EXPENDITURE IS PERSONAL IN N ATURE, THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING O FFICER AND AS CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) STANDS CONFIRMED. 8 . I N RESPECT OF THE LOSS ON SALE OF CAR, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A STOCKIST OF M ARBLES, S LA B , T ILES, G RANITE AND T TONE. ADMITTEDL Y THE LOSS ON THE SALE OF CAR IS A CAPITAL EXPENDITURE AND THE SAME WOULD HAVE TO BE REDUCED FROM THE BLOCK OF ASSETS. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO GRANT THE ASSES S EE THE REDUCTION OF THE LOSS AGAINST BLOCK OF ASSETS. 9 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSEESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 3 RD FEBRUARY , 201 5 . SD/ - GEORGE MATHAN ( JUDICIAL MEMBER) KOLKATA, TH E 2 3 RD D AY OF FEBRUARY , 201 5 COPIES TO : (1) BRIJENDRA KUMAR KEDIA , KEDIA HOUSE, P - 503, KEYATALA ROAD, KOLKATA - 700 029 (2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 30(2), KOLKATA, 2, GARIAHAT ROAD, KOLKATA - 700 031 (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( 5 ) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ( 6 ) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/ SR. P.S .