IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : KOLKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SRI D. K. TYAGI, JM & HONBLE SRI C . D. RAO, AM] I.T.A. NO.1539/KOL/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 RAMESH J. PARNANI -VS- INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WD-3 3(1), KOLKATA (PA NO.AKHPP 3574 F) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SRI SUBHAS AGARWAL RESPONDENT BY : SRI P. KOLHE O R D E R PER D. K. TYAGI, JM: THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED A GAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), KOLKATA DATED 14.08.2009 FOR ASSESSMENT YEA R 2005-06 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. FOR THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A)-XX/ KOLKATA HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN CONFIRMING THE DISA LLOWANCE AND ADDITION OF RS.6838.00 BEING THE LOSS ON SALE OF MOTOR CAR. 2. FOR THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A)- XX/KOLKATA HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN CONFIRMING THE DISA LLOWANCE AND ADDITION OF RS.2223.00 OUT OF TOTAL EXPENSES OF RS.11117.00 BEING THE AMOU NT OF TEA & SNACKS EXPENSES. 3. FOR THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A)- XX/KOLKATA HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN CONFIRMING THE DISA LLOWANCE AND ADDITION OF RS.2291.00 BEING THE AMOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN PURCHASE ACCOUNT. 4. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A)-XX/KOLKAT A HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE AN D ADDITION OF 17000.00 BEING THE AMOUNT OF COMMISSION PAID TOWARDS SALE OF FLAT. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US THE ASSESSEE DI D NOT PRESS GROUND NOS. 1 AND 3. HENCE, THE SAME ARE DISMISSED. 3. GROUND NO. 2 RELATES TO CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWA NCE OF RS.2223.00 OUT OF TOTAL EXPENSES OF RS.11,117/- ON ACCOUNT OF TEA AND SNAC KS EXPENSES. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY PERUSING THE MATERIAL AVA ILABLE ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE AO DISALLOWED RS.2223/- I.E. 20% OF THE EXPENSES OF RS .11,117/- CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE SINCE THE EXPENSES WERE NOT SUPPORTED BY PROPER EVI DENCE. SINCE THE AMOUNT INVOLVED IN THIS CASE IS SO MEAGER AND CONSIDERING THE BUSIN ESS OF THE ASSESSEE, WE DELETE THE 2 DISALLOWANCE SO CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A). THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS, THEREFORE, ALLOWED. 4. GROUND NO. 4 RELATES TO CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWA NCE OF RS.17000/- ON ACCOUNT OF COMMISSION PAID TOWARDS SALE OF FLAT. FACTS IN B RIEF ARE THAT THE AO DISALLOWED THE PAYMENT OF COMMISSION OF RS.17,000/- CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE AS THE IDENTITY OF THE PERSON COULD NOT BE ESTABLISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. I N APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL SUBM ISSIONS AND CAREFULLY PERUSING THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE ASSE SSEE COULD NOT FILE THE CONFIRMATION LETTER BEFORE THE AO BUT FILED THE SAME BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. THEREFORE, OPPORTUNITY OF BEING CONSIDERED THE SAID CONFIRMATI ON LETTER BY THE AO MUST BE GIVEN. HENCE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE RESTORE THE M ATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO DECIDE THE MATTER AFRESH AND ACCORDING TO LAW AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PA RTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30. 4.10 SD/- SD/- (C. D. RAO) (D. K. TYAGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 30TH APRIL, 2010 COPY TO : 1. SRI RAMESH J. PARNANI, F-7, A.C. MARKET, 1, SHAKESP EARE SARANI, KOLKATA-71. 2. ITO, WARD-33(1), KOLKATA 3. CIT(A), KOLKATA. 4. CIT, KOLKATA. 5. D.R., ITAT, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR JD.(SR.P.S.) I.T.AT., KOLKATA