Shri AMIT NARAYAN PATIL, Sangli V. ITO, Sangli

ITA 1539/PUN/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 153924514 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-05-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 02-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 02-08-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KIRAN S DESH
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

] ]] ] IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A, PUNE , !, # $ BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, AM ITA NO.1539/PN/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 SHRI AMIT NARAYAN PATIL, PROP. BHARATI BUILDERS, SATALYA BUNGLOW, NEAR GUEST HOUSE, VISHRAMBAG, SANGLI. PAN : AHAPP9137A . APPELLANT VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), SANGLI. . RESPONDENT / APPELLANT BY : NONE / RESPONDENT BY : KIRAN S. DESHPANDE / DATE OF HEARING : 02.05.2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 27.05.2016 % / ORDER PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, AM : THE CAPTIONED APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), KOLHAPUR DATED 04.06.2013 RELATING TO ASSES SMENT YEAR 2009-10 PASSED UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 196 1 (IN SHORT THE ACT). 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE INSPITE OF SERVICE OF NOTICE. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESE NTATIVE, KIRAN S. DESHPANDE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT/REVE NUE. INITIALLY, THE HEARING WAS FIXED ON 20.08.2014. ON 20.08.2014, TH E APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED TO 08.12.2014 AT THE REQUEST OF THE LD. AR FOR THE ASS ESSEE. THEREAFTER, THE APPEAL WAS REGULARLY ADJOURNED TO VARIOUS DATES OF HEARING I.E. 17.03.2015, 23.06.2015, 28.09.2015, 28.12.2015, 30.12.2015, 29. 03.2016, 28.04.2016 AT THE REQUEST OF THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE AND THE APPEAL WAS CONSISTENTLY RE- 2 ITA NO.1539/PN/2013 FIXED FOR HEARING AS PER DATE OF ADJOURNMENT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. FINALLY, THE APPEAL WAS ONCE AGAIN ADJOURNED TO 02.05.2016. HOWEVER, ON 02.05.2016 NEITHER APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT BY THE ASSESSEE. IT THUS APPEARS THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY APPEARANCE BY THE AS SESSEE IN PERSON OR THROUGH AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE INSPITE OF SERVICE OF NOT ICE, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE AFTER HEARING THE RESPONDENT/REVENUE ON MERITS IN TERMS OF RULE 24 OF THE INCOME TAX (AP PELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES, 1963. 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE ASSESSEE HAS UNDERTAKEN CONT RACT FOR ERECTION AND INSTALLATION FOR TELECOMMUNICATION COMPANIES WHICH INCLUDES INDUS TOWERS LTD., BHARATI INFRATEL LTD., ESSAR TELECOM INFRASTR UCTURE PVT. LTD. AND QUIPPA TELECOM INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.. THE ASSES SING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT AS PER TDS CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY THESE COMPANIES, TOTAL RECEIPT BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR WAS RS.3,49,47,337/-. HOWEVER, IN THE ACCOUNTS, THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCLOSED CONTRACT RECEIPT AT RS.3,34,12,143/-. THEREFORE, DISCLOSURE OF CONTRACT WORK RECEIPT WAS SHORT BY AN AMOUNT OF RS. 15,34,194/-. THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO RECONCILE THE RECEIPTS QUA TDS CERTIFICATES INSPITE OF SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT REPEATED OPPORTUNITIES WERE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO JUSTIFY AND SUPPORT T HE INCOME RETURNED BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES. HOWEVER, ASSESSEE FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE STATUTORY NOTICES. ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSMENT WAS FINALIZED EX-PARTE UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE ACT AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER PROCEEDED TO E STIMATE THE NET PROFIT AT 10% OF THE ADJUSTED CONTRACT RECEIPT OF RS.3,49,47, 337/- WHICH WORKED OUT TO RS.34,94,734/- AS AGAINST THE NET LOSS OF RS.3,31,5 46/- DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS ACCOUNTS. 4. THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). BEFORE THE CIT(A) ALSO THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE DATES OF HEA RING. THE CIT(A) ACCORDINGLY ENDORSED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OF FICER. 3 ITA NO.1539/PN/2013 5. AGGRIEVED THERETO, THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED SE COND APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 6. WHILE ACCEPTING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFI CER TOWARDS ESTIMATION AS PER GROUND NO.1 OF THE APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE IMPU GNED THE ADJUSTMENT IN THE CONTRACT RECEIPT IN VIEW OF THE DIFFERENCE AS PER T DS CERTIFICATES. THE ASSESSEE ALSO IMPUGNED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER I N RESORTING TO SECTION 144 OF THE ACT AND FRAMING EX-PARTE ASSESSMENT WITHOUT ISSUING OF SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE IN THIS REGARD AS MANDATED BY SECTION 144(1) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE NEXT QUESTIONED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND ALLEGED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DOES NOT CONFIRM TO THE MANDATE OF SECTION 250(6) O F THE ACT. 7. NONE APPEARED FOR ASSESSEE AS NOTED EARLIER. 8. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVE NUE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CO-OPERATED WITH THE REVENUE IN TH E PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND HAS FAILED TO PROVIDE ANY RELEVANT INFORMATION TO SUPPORT THE RETURN OF INCOM E FILED. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS JUST AND FAIR IN ESTIMATING T HE INCOME AT A REASONABLE 10% OF THE GROSS VALUE IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY SPECIF IC INFORMATION FORTHCOMING. BEFORE THE CIT(A) ALSO, ASSESSEE HAS ALSO NOT SUPPO RTED THE RETURN OF INCOME AND THEREFORE NO INTERFERENCE AT THIS STAGE IS CALL ED FOR. 9. WE NOTICE FROM THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER AND THE CIT(A) THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE THE CLAIM A S PER THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS WELL AS IN T HE APPELLATE PROCEEDING. THE ASSESSING OFFICER BASED ON CONCRETE INFORMATION AVA ILABLE AS PER TDS CERTIFICATES HAS SUBSTITUTED THE CONTRACT VALUE OF THE TDS CERTIFICATES WHICH CANNOT BE FAULTED IN THE ABSENCE OF RECONCILIATION FROM ASSESSEE. THE ESTIMATION OF NET PROFIT AT THE RATE OF 10% OF THE CONTRACT RECEIPT ALSO APPEARS FAIR AND REASONABLE IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY COGENT EV IDENCES TO THE CONTRARY BEFORE US. THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF HAS TO BLAME FOR EX-PARTE ASSESSMENT AND TOTAL 4 ITA NO.1539/PN/2013 NON-COOPERATION. IN THE TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES, WE DECLINE TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 10. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DI SMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 27 TH DAY OF MAY, 2016. SD/- SD/- ( SUSHMA CHOWLA ) ( PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA ) / JUDICIAL MEMBER # / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE ; DATED : 27 TH MAY, 2016. % & '() *)' / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1) THE ASSESSEE; 2) THE DEPARTMENT; 3) THE CIT(A), KOLHAPUR; 4) THE CIT- II, KOLHAPUR; 5) THE DR A BENCH, I.T.A.T., PUNE; 6) GUARD FILE. %+ / BY ORDER , ' # //TRUE COPY// $ %& # '( / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ) '* , / ITAT, PUNE