M/s Hipeak Impex Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 1513/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 151320114 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-11-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 18-10-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 28-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SALIL MISHRA
• Assessee Lawyers: SATISH KUMAR GOEL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH C DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.L. SETHI AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL ITA NO. 1513(DEL)/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 HI PEAK IMPEX PVT. LTD., INCOME-TAX OFFICER, BQ-19, SHALIMAR BAGH, VS. WA RD 12(4), NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. PAN: AABCH2654R (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SATISH KUMAR GOEL, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SH RI SALIL MISHRA, DR DATE OF HEA RING : 18.10.2011 DATE OF PRO NOUNCEMENT : 04.11.2011 ORDER PER K.G. BANSAL : AM THE ONLY SUBSTANTIVE GROUND TAKEN BY THE ASSESSE E IN THIS APPEAL IS THAT THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN CONFIRMING DI SALLOWANCE OF RS. 13,21,599/- OUT OF EXPENSES OF RS. 15,85,302/-. 2. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE RETURN W AS FILED ON 30.03.2007 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 8,872/-. THIS RETUR N WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) ON 26.03.2008. THEREAFTER, NOTICE U/S 143(2) WA S ISSUED AND SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY. IT WAS INTER-ALIA FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED ITA NO. 1513(DEL)/2011 2 EXPENDITURE OF RS. 15,85,302/-. IT WAS REQUIRED T O FURNISH EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE EXPENDITURE. HOWEVER, THE ASSESS EE DID NOT FURNISH ANY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE EXPENDITURE. THEREFO RE, A SUM OF RS. 13,21,599/- WAS DISALLOWED. 2.1 THE ASSESSEE MADE VARIOUS SUBMISSIONS BEFO RE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IN THE MATTER. AS NO VERIFICATION CO ULD BE MADE IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT, THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) CALLED FOR THE REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO. IT WAS MENTIONED THAT THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED BOOKS BEFORE THE AO ON 17.11.200 8 IS NOT CORRECT. NO BILL OR VOUCHER WAS ALSO PRODUCED. THIS REMAND R EPORT WAS FURNISHED TO THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT FULL DETAI LS OF ALL THE EXPENSES WERE SUBMITTED. THE DETAILS OF THE EXPENSES UNDER THE HEADS AUDIT FEES, ADVERTISEMENT EXPENSES, BANK CHARGES, BANK EXPEN SES AND OTHER EXPENSES WERE ALSO FURNISHED. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) CONSI DERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE HIM. IT HAS INT ER-ALIA BEEN MENTIONED THAT BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WERE NOT PRODUCED BEFORE THE AO IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. BILLS OR VOUCHERS WERE ALSO NOT PRODUCED. THEREFORE, THE CONTENTION THAT THE EXPENSES WERE INCURRED FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS HAS NOT BEEN SUBSTANTIATED. ACCORDINGL Y, THE ORDER WAS UPHELD. ITA NO. 1513(DEL)/2011 3 3. THE ONLY SUBMISSION MADE BEFORE US BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT ALL THE EXPENSES ARE VOUCHE D, THE DETAILS OF WHICH HAD BEEN FURNISHED TO THE AO. HOWEVER, HE WAS OPEN TO VERIFICATION BY THE AO AGAIN. IN REPLY, THE LD. DR HAD NO OBJECTI ON TO FRESH VERIFICATION OF EXPENSES BY THE AO. 3.1 AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF RIVAL P ARTIES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ENDS OF JUSTICE WOULD BE MET IF THE CASE IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR VERIFYING THE EXPENSES AND P ASSING A FRESH ORDER AS PER LAW AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS TREATED AS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SD/- SD/- (C.L. SETHI) (K.G.BANSAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SP SATIA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. HI PEAK IMPEX PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI. 2. ITO, WARD 12(4), NEW DELHI. 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. THE DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR.