The ITO, Ward-7(1), Surat V. Shri Anandkumar Sohanlal Jain, Surat

ITA 1450/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 145020514 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 3 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 19-08-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 20-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VILAS SHINDE
• Keywords: Depreciation
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD D BENCH BEFORE: S H RI G. D. AGRAWAL , VICE PRESIDENT AND SHR I S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 9(4), SURAT (APPELLANT) VS ANANDKUMAR SOHANLAL JAIN, 105, DERATNA APARTMENT, RAMPURA MAIN ROAD, SURAT PAN; ABXPJ0355R (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : S H RI VILAS SHINDE , SR. D . R. ASSESSEE BY: NONE DATE OF HEARING : 19 - 08 - 2 015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26 - 08 - 2 015 / ORDER P ER : S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER : - THIS REVENUE S APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2007 - 08, AR ISES FROM ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - V, SURAT DATED 17 - 01 - 2011 IN APPEAL NO. CAS - V/166 /09 - I T A NO . 1450 / A HD/20 1 1 A SSESSMENT YEAR 200 7 - 08 I.T.A NO. 1450 /AHD/20 11 A.Y . 2007 - 08 PAGE NO ITO VS. ANANDKUMAR SOHANLAL JAIN 2 10, IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 14 4 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT . 2. THE REVENUE S SOLE SUBSTANTIVE GROUND CHALLENGES T HE CIT(A) S ORDER RESTRICTING DISALLOWANCE/ADDITION OF RS. 25,96,815/ - MADE @ 30% OF THE EXPENDITURE CLAIMED OF RS. 86,56,50/ - TO THAT OF RS. 12,98,407.5/ - @ 15% THEREOF ONLY. FACTS OF THE CASE ARE IN A NARROW COMPASS. THE ASSESSEE DERIVES INCOME F R O M B USINESS AND HOUSE PROPERTY. HE CLAIMED GROSS EXPENSES OF RS. 86, 56,050/ - INCURRED ON DEPRECIATION, SALARY AND WAGES AND OTHER HEADS. THE SAME WERE DEBITED IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AS WELL. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SOUGHT FOR NECESSARY EVIDENCE. THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT SEEM TO HAVE FILED ANY. THIS MADE THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DISALLOW A SUM OF RS. 25,96,815/ - @ 30% OF THE GROSS AMOUNT IN ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 24 - 12 - 2009. 3. THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL. THE CIT(A) S IN THE ORDER UNDER CHALLEN GES HOLDS THAT THE ASSESSEE S AUDIT REPORT FORMED PART OF RECORD AND SOME COMPARISON OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BEFORE FRAMING SECTION 144 ASSESSMENT IN QUESTION. HE OBSERVES THAT EXPENSES ON WAGES HAD REDUCED SUBSTANTIALLY AND SOM E EXPENSES WERE ON THE RISE DUE TO INFLATION AND OTHER REASON. HE IS ALSO OF THE VIEW THAT ASSESSEE S BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ARE DULY AUDITED AND THERE IS NO QUALIFICATION IN THE AUDIT REPORT QUA THE SAME. THEREAFTER, THE CIT(A) S QUOTES ASSESSEE S I.T.A NO. 1450 /AHD/20 11 A.Y . 2007 - 08 PAGE NO ITO VS. ANANDKUMAR SOHANLAL JAIN 3 FAILURE AND RESTRICTS THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE FROM 30% OF THE GROSS EXPENSE TO THAT @ 15% ONLY. 4. THE REVENUE STRONGLY REITERATES THE ASSESSING OFFICER S FINDINGS TO PRAY FOR RESTORATION OF THE ENTIRE DISALLOWANCE. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT COME PRESENT DESPITE SE RVICE OF NOTICE THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT. IT IS PROCEEDED EX - PARTE ACCORDINGLY. WE COME TO THE MERITS OF THE CASE AND FIND THAT THE SAME INVOLVE ESTIMATED DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER @ 30% RESTRICTED BY THE CIT(A) TO THAT @ 15% T HEREOF UNDER CHALLENGE. IN OTHER WORDS, THIS IS A CASE OF ESTIMATION ONLY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOWHERE DOUBTED GENUINENESS OF THE ASSESSEE S CLAIM OTHERWISE. WE OBSERVE IN THESE FACTS THAT THE LOWER AUTHORITY S VIEW UNDER CHALLENGE DESERVES TO BE UPHELD SINCE THE SAME IS ADOPTED IN PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ALSO FOR WANT OF ANY SPECIFIC ERROR THEREIN. THE REVENUE S ARGUMENTS ACCORDINGLY FAIL. 4.1 THIS REVENUE S APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OURT ON 26 - 08 - 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( G.D. AGRAWAL ) ( S. S. GODARA ) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 26 /08 /2015 AK / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE I.T.A NO. 1450 /AHD/20 11 A.Y . 2007 - 08 PAGE NO ITO VS. ANANDKUMAR SOHANLAL JAIN 4 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,