SHRI DEEPAK GODHA, UDAIPUR V. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, Jaipur

ITA 1396/JPR/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 139623114 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 07-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R H GOYAL
• Keywords: Corroborative evidences
• Section: 133(6)

Judgement Text

1 ITA 1396-10 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH SMC JODHPUR. ( BEFORE SHRI R.K. GUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ) ITA NO. 1396/JODH/2010 ASSTT. YEAR : 2006-07. SHRI DEEPAK GODHA VS. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, 222, ASHOK NAGAR, MAIN ROAD, UDAIPUR. UDAIPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R.H. GOYAL DATE OF HEARING :05.12.2011. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT :09.12.2011. ORDER DATED : 09.12.2011. THIS IS AN APPEAL BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A) RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE ONLY GROUND IN THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,44,889/- ON ACCOUNT OF COMMISSION PAID. 3. ASSESSEE DERIVED COMMISSION INCOME ON SALE OF SE GMENT AND DIAMOND TOOLS USED IN MARBLE CUTTING GANGSAW. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NO TED THAT OUT OF TOTAL COMMISSION OF RS. 3,89,.763/-, THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID 50% COMMISSI ON TO TWO PERSONS I.E. SHRI GOVIND SINGH AND SHRI AMAR CHAND. AFFIDAVITS OF BOTH THES E PERSONS WERE FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HOWEVER, SUMMONS SENT ON THE ADD RESS GIVEN IN THE AFFIDAVIT WERE RETURNED BACK. THEREFORE, ASSESSING OFFICER DREW A N ADVERSE INFERENCE AGAINST THE 2 ASSESSEE AND REJECTED THE CLAIM OF COMMISSION PAYME NT. IN THIS WAY ADDITION OF RS. 1,94,881/- WAS MADE. THE LD. CIT (A) AFTER CONSIDE RING THE SUBMISSIONS OBSERVED THAT IN VIEW OF BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY, IF AN AMOUNT OF RS. 50 ,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF COMMISSION IS ALLOWED, THAT WILL MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. THE R EMAINING AMOUNT OF RS. 1,44,881/- WAS SUSTAINED. 4. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. THE LD. D/R PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A). 6. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING OF FICER AND LD. CIT (A), I FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAD PAID COMMISSION TO TWO PERSONS. IN RES PONSE TO NOTICE UNDER SECTION 133(6) TO M/S. SADBHAVANA SANGMERMER PVT. LTD., THE COMPAN Y VIDE ITS LETTER HAS STATED THAT THERE WERE TWO REPRESENTATIVES OF THE M/S. ASTRA DI AMOND TOOLS PVT. LTD., NAMELY, SHRI AMAR CHAND AND SHRI GOVIND SINGH WITH WHOM THEY HAV E DEALT WITH. HOWEVER, THIS LETTER WAS NOT CONSIDERED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS NO OTHER SUPPORTING EVIDENCE WAS FILED. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS NOT TAKEN INTO CONSIDERA TION THIS LETTER. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT IF A FURTH ER ADDITION OF RS. 1,00,000/- IS DELETED THAT WILL MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. ACCORDINGLY, I FURTHER ALLOW A RELIEF OF RS. 1,00,000/- AND THE REMAINING AMOUNT OF RS. 44,881/- IS SUSTAIN ED. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED IN PART. 8. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09. 12.2011. SD/- ( R.K. GUPTA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER JODHPUR, 3 COPY FORWARDED TO :- SHRI DEEPAK GODHA, UDAIPUR. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR. THE CIT (A) THE CIT THE D/R GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 1396/JODH/2010) BY ORDER, AR ITAT JODHPUR.