ITO, Ropar V. M/s Anoop Singh & Co., Ropar

ITA 15/CHANDI/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 1521514 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-03-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 05-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N K SAINI
• Assessee Lawyers: ADITYA KUMAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BEN CH A BEFORE SHRI H.L.KARWA, VP AND SHRI MEHAR SINGH, AM ITA NO. 15/CHD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 I.T.O. WARD 2(2), ROPAR V. M/S ANOOP SINGH & CO 180, GZ.S.N. , ROPAR PAN: AANBF 8032 F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI N.K. SAINI RESPONDENT BY: S/SHRI ASHWANI KUMAR & ADITYA KUMAR DATE OF HEARING: 16.2.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 07.03.2012 ORDER PER MEHAR SINGH, AM THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE, FOR ASSES SMENT YEAR 2008-09, IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A ), CHANDIGARH DATED 21.10.2011/14.11.2011 U/S 250(6) OF THE INCOM E-TAX ACT (IN SHORT THE ACT). 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN GRANTING RELIEF TO THE ASSE SSEE HOLDING THAT HE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN NET RECEIPTS IGNORING TH E FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT TAKEN SUCH PLEA BEFORE THE AO . 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE FACT TH AT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT DISCLOSED EXPENDITURE OF RS. 22,84 ,104/- ALLEGEDLY INCURRED ON THE PAYMENT TO TRUCK OWNERS B EFORE THE AO. 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO ADD OR AMEND ANY GROUND AND GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE THE APPEAL IS HEARD OR DIS POSED OFF. 4. IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) BE CANCELLELD AND THAT OF THE AO MAY BE RESTORED. 3. THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE REVENUE. THE LD 'DR' F OR THE REVENUE AT THE OUTSET CONTENDED THAT THE INSTANT APPEAL FIL ED ON 4.1.2012 IS 2 IN TIME. THE DATE OF COMMUNICATION OF THE ORDER AP PEALED AGAINST IN FORM NO. 36 VIDE COLUMN NO. 9 IS WRONGLY MENTIONED AS 28.1.2011 WHERE AS THE DATE OF ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS 21. 10.2011. THIS ASSERTION WAS NOT REBUTTED BY THE LD 'AR' FOR THE A SSESSEE. THE LD 'DR' FOR THE REVENUE PLACED RELIED ON THE ASSESSMEN T ORDER. HOWEVER, THE LD 'AR' FOR THE ASSESSEE PLACED RELIAN CE ON THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE FACT SITUATION OF THE CASE AND THE RIVAL RECORD. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT SCRUTINY OF THE DETAIL FIELD BY THE ASSESSEE REVEALS THAT THE WORK DONE BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IS OF RS. 2,90,57,735/- WHEREAS IN THE PROFIT ALLOWED LOSS ACCOUNT, THE WOR K DONE HAS BEEN SHOWS AT RS. 2,,67,73,631/- BUT TDS CREDIT HAS BEEN CLAIMED ON FULL AMOUNT OF RS. 2,90,57,735/-. ACCORDINGLY A SHOW-CA USE NOTICE WAS ISSUED VIDE NO. 1861 DATED 29.10.2010 RELEVANT PART OF THE SAME IS REPRODUCED AS FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE TDS CERTIFIC ATE FIELD BY YOU AND THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT FILED ALONG WITH TH E AUDITED BALANCE SHEET IT HAS BEEN REVEALED THAT YOUR TURNOVER EXCLU DING HANDLING CHARGING RECEIVED IS RS. 2,90,57,735/- AND NOT RS. 2,67,73,631/- SHOWN BY YOU AS UNDER: I) AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM FCI, LUDHIANA RS. 2,48,95, 494/- II) AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM FCI, CHD RS. 41,62,24 1/- TOTAL RS. 2,90,57,735/- LESS: AS PER P&L ACCOUNT RS. 2,67,73,631/- DIFFERENCE RS. 22,84,104/- YOU HAVE CLAIMED REFUND ON TDS DEDUCTED BY FCI CHAN DIGARH AS WELL AS BY FCI, LUDHIANA AND HAVE ALSO CLAIMED ALL THE EXPENSES. YOU ARE REQUESTED TO SHOW-CAUSE AS TO WHY THE DIFFE RENCE OF RS. 22,84,104/- MAY NOT BE ADDED TOWARDS YOUR TAXABLE I NCOME. ON 3 14.12.2010 SHRI ANOOP SINGH PARTNER AND SHRI JEEVAN JOT SINGH, COUNSEL ATTENDED THE PROCEEDINGS. FILED WRITTEN RE PLY AS UNDER: IT IS REQUESTED THAT OUR CASE ANOOP SINGH AND CO. HAS BEEN SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY. IN WHICH DIFFERENCE OF AMOU NT OF GROSS RECEIPTS DEPICTED BY YOU. THE AMOUNT IS RS. 22,84, 104/- ACTUAL GROSS RECEIPT WAS RS. 26,77,363/-. BECAUSE THE PAYMENT OF RS. 228410/- MADE BY THE DEPARTMENT TO T HE TRUCK OWNERS DIRECTLY AND DUE TDS DEDUCED IN THE NAME OF ANOOP SINGH I.E. THE REASON WHY THAT DIFFERENCE OF AMOUNT RS. 22,84,104/- CAME INTO EXISTENCE. THE REPLY FILED BY THE ASSESSEE CARRIES NO WEIGHTAG E AND IS WITHOUT ANY MERITS. THE DEPARTMENT I.E. FCI HAD MADE THE P AYMENT DIRECT TO THE TRUCK OPERATIONS ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, DUE CREDIT FOR THE SAME WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO TAKEN CREDIT FOR THE TDS DEDUCTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. IT IS, THEREFORE, CLEAR THAT THE ASSES SEE HAS CONCEALED PARTICULARS OF INCOME. AN ADDITION OF RS. 22,84,10 4/- HAS BEEN MADE TOWARDS THE TAXABLE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON THIS ACCOUNT. 5. THE LD. CIT(A) ON APPRECIATION OF THE SUBMISSION S FIELD BY HIM ADJUDICATED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. WE DEEM IT PROPER TO REPRODUCE THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN THE MATTER AS CONTAINED IN PARA 2.4 OF HIS ORDER: 2.4 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. C OUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT. I HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE ASSESS MENT RECORDS OF THE CASE. A PERUSAL OF PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT REVEALS THAT THE APPELLANT HAD SHOWN AMOUNT RECEIVE D ON BEHALF OF TRUCK OWNERS OF RS. 2,90,57,735/- IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT OUT OF WHICH AMOUNT PAID TO TRUCK OWNE RS OF RS. 22,84,104/- HAS BEEN DEDUCTED. THE APPELLANT COULD HAVE CLAIMED THIS AMOUNT AS EXPENDITURE, INSTEAD OF SUBT RACTING IT FROM THE AMOUNT RECEIVED. THE AMOUNT RECEIVED AS PE R TDS CERTIFICATE IS ALSO RS. 2,90,57,535/- AND SO THERE IS NO UNDERSTATEMENT OF RECEIPTS AND IN ANY CASE, IT WILL NOT MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE TO THE NET PROFIT DECLARED BY THE AP PELLANT. HENCE, THE ADDITION MADE OF RS. 22,84,104/- IS DELE TED. GROUND OF APPEAL NO. 1 IS ALLOWED. 6. HAVING REGARD TO THE FACT SITUATION OF THE CASE, RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A), WE DO NOT FINDING ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). HENCE TH E SAME IS UPHELD. 4 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 07 .03.2012 SD/- SD/- (H.L. KARWA) (MEHAR SINGH) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHANDIGARH, THE 07.03.2012 SURESH COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR