Shri Binod Kumar, Jamshedpur V. JCIT, Jamshedpur

ITA 139/RAN/2016

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Binod Kumar, an individual engaged in contract business, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jamshedpur. The appeal was directed against the additions made to his income for the assessment year 2011-12, which included sundry creditors and disallowed contract expenditure. The assessee had declared an income of Rs.25,02,890 and was subjected to scrutiny assessment. Both the Assessing Officer and the CIT(Appeals) confirmed the additions due to the assessee's non-compliance and failure to provide necessary details. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, noting the habitual non-appearance of the assessee and the lack of any written submission or documents to support his claims.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 129008 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 6 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-11-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 14-11-2022
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 03-05-2016
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 142(1); 250

Judgement Text

ITA No. 139/RAN/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-2012 Shri Binod Kumar, Jamshedpur 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA-RANCHI ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA [Virtual Court Hearing] Before Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member I.T.A. No. 139/RAN/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Shri Binod Kumar,........................................................................Appellant Flat No. 3-2/F, 4/B, Moon City, Dimna Road, Mango, Jamshedpur-834011 [PAN: AJVPK3618G] -Vs.- Joint Commissioner of Income Tax,............................................Respondent Range-1, Jamshedpur Appearances by: N o n e, appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Rupesh Agarwal, ACIT (DR), appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing : November 15, 2022 Date of pronouncing the order: November 17, 2022 O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member:- The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jamshedpur dated 28.10.2015 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee read as under:- (i) Inspite of declaring more than 5% net profit, audited account has not been considered and all sundry creditors amounting to Rs.50,01,167/- is added back to my income. (ii) Contract expenditure is mandatory expenditure for running contract business and inspite of this fact ITA No. 139/RAN/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-2012 Shri Binod Kumar, Jamshedpur 2 this expenditure is disallowed and added back which is against the natural justice. (iii) Ld. Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A), Jamshedpur, both have not justified in passing ex-parte order. (iv) Rest grounds may be submitted before Hon’ble Tribunal at the time of hearing. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, who is engaged in contract business. Income of Rs.25,02,890/- declared in the return was filed on 30.09.2011. The case of assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment followed by service of valid notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act. The assessee remained non-compliant during the course of assessment proceedings. The ld. Assessing Officer on the basis of details available on record observed that the assessee has shown sundry creditors of Rs.50,01,167/-. However, for lack of details filed by the assessee and complete non-compliance, the said amount was added to the income of the assessee alongwith the other addition for disallowance of contract expenditure at Rs.10,00,000/- and finally income assessed at Rs.85,04,057/-. 4. The assessee challenged this addition before the ld. CIT(Appeals), but again could not file any details and also did not attend on the basis of various dates of hearing. As a result, the ld. CIT(Appeals) confirmed the order of the ld. Assessing Officer. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing before us. 7. We have heard the ld. Departmental Representative and perused the relevant material available before us. The contention of the assessee is that firstly when the assessee has declared net profit rate of 5%, the ld. ITA No. 139/RAN/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-2012 Shri Binod Kumar, Jamshedpur 3 CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming the addition for sundry creditors amounting to Rs.50,01,167/- and secondly, it is contended that the disallowance for contract expenditure was uncalled for as it is mandatory for any contract business. We find that the ld. Assessing Officer has not rejected the book results and has not estimated the profits of the assessee and for want of necessary details made the addition for sundry creditors of Rs.50,01,167/- and also disallowed the contract expenditure of Rs.10,00,000/-. We fail to find out any merit in the grounds of appeal, firstly, there is no provision under the Act which stops the Assessing Officer from making the addition for sundry creditors and disallowance of expenditure if net profit declared by the assessee is more than 5% if assessee is not covered under presumptive taxation. Secondly, the assessee failed to furnish the details called for by the ld. Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(Appeals). Before us also, the assessee has not filed any written submission or any documents. Under these given facts and circumstances, we find no merit in the grounds raised by the assessee and thus no interference is called for in the finding of the ld. CIT(Appeals), the effective Grounds No. 1 & 2 are dismissed. 8. Ground No. 3 is challenging the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) that both the lower authorities were not justified in passing the ex-parte order, we find that it has no merit as the assessee seems to be a habitual offender and does not appear on the given dates of hearing before any of the authorities below. Thus this ground is also dismissed. 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on November 17 th , 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (Sonjoy Sarma) (Manish Borad) Judicial Member Accountant Member Kolkata, the 17 th day of November, 2022 ITA No. 139/RAN/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-2012 Shri Binod Kumar, Jamshedpur 4 Copies to : (1) Shri Binod Kumar, Flat No. 3-2/F, 4/B, Moon City, Dimna Road, Mango, Jamshedpur-834011 (2) Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-1, Jamshedpur (3) Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), Jamshedpur; (4) Commissioner of Income Tax- , Jamshedpur; (4) The Departmental Representative (5) Guard File TRUE COPY By order Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata Laha/Sr. P.S.