Shri Siri Gopal Singh, Ambala Cantt. V. DCIT, Ambala

ITA 1448/CHANDI/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1408 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-02-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 27-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N K SAINI
• Section: 234B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHAND IGARH BENCH A BEFORE HONBLE SHRI D K SRIVASTAVA, AM AND HONBLE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM ITA NO. 1448/CHANDI/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 SIRI GOPAL SINGHAL V DCIT, AMBALA PROP: M/S LABORATORY INSTRUMENTS & CHEMICALS GRAIN MARKET, AMBALA CANTT PAN: ABJPS 6023 P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI TEJ MOHAN SINGH RESPONDENT BY: SHRI NK SAINI ORDER D K SRIVASTAVA: THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) ON 12.11.2010, ON TH E FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1 THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS IN UPHOLDING THE 15% OF THE OUTWARD FREIGHT EXPENSES AND TRAVELI NG EXPENSES ON ADHOC BASIS OUT OF THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO AT RS. 50,000/- EACH RESPECTIVELY WHICH IS ARBITRARY AND UNJUSTIFIED. 2 THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FURTHER ERRED IN UPHOLDI NG THE DL OF RS. 5000/- OUT OF A DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 10,000/- INCURR ED AS SALE PROMOTION EXPENSES WHICH IS AGAIN ARBITRARY AND UNJUSTIFIED. 3 THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FURTHER ERRED IN UPHOLDI NG THE CHARGING OF THE INTEREST U/S 234B OF ACT WHICH IS NOT CHARGEABL E IN THE INSTANT CASE. 4 THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS, A RBITRARY, OPPOSED TO LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE AND IS, THUS, UNTENABLE. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS A PROPRIETOR OF M/S LABORATORY I NSTRUMENTS AND CHEMICALS AT AMBALA CANTT. HE FILED HIS RETURN OF I NCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL ON 29.10.2007 RETURNING TOTAL INCOME AT RS. 11,85,029/-. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY. WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSM ENT THE AO DISALLOWED CERTAIN EXPENSES WHICH WERE SUBSEQUENTLY SUBJECT MA TTER OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). IN PARA 4.1 OF THE APPELLATE ORDER, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CATEGORICALLY GIVEN A FINDING THAT THE AO HAS NOT IDENTIFIED ANY VOUCHERS/EXPENSES WHICH WERE INCURRED IN CASH AND WERE NOT PROPERLY VOUCHED. HOW EVER THE LD. CIT(A) HAS SIRI GOPAL SINGHAL, AMBALA CANTT 1448/CHANDI/2010 2 2 SUSTAINED THE IMPUGNED ADDITION ON THE GROUND THAT THE EXPENSES CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE EXCESSIVE. 3. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL T HE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE AFTER COMING TO THE CONCLUSION THAT TH E AO HAS NOT IDENTIFIED ANY VOUCHERS/EXPENSES WHICH WERE INCURRED IN CASH AND W ERE NOT PROPERLY VOUCHED. 4. IN REPLY THE DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER PASSED BY TH E LD. CIT(A). 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. IN PARA 4.1 OF T HE APPELLATE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), THE LD. CIT(A) HAS RECORDED HIS FINDING THAT THE AO HAS NOT IDENTIFIED ANY VOUCHERS/EXPENSES WHICH WERE INCURRE D IN CASH AND WERE NOT PROPERLY VOUCHED. HAVING COME TO THE CONCLUSION THA T ALL THE EXPENSES WERE FULLY VOUCHED, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN THIS BEHALF IS VACATED. APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 18 FEBRUARY.2011 SD/- SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (D K SRIVASTAVA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHANDIGARH: THE 18 FEBRUAY.2011 SURESH COPY TO: 1 THE APPELLANT, SIRI GOPAL SINGHAL, AMBALA CANTT 2 THE RESPONDENT, D.C.I.T. AMBALA 3 THE CIT, PANCHKULA 4 THE CIT(A), PANCHKULA 5 THE DR, I.T.A.T. CHANDIGARH BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH SIRI GOPAL SINGHAL, AMBALA CANTT 1448/CHANDI/2010 3 3