Narendra Kumar Rajeev Kumar, Farrukhabad V. Dy. C.I.T., Circle-2(1), Farrukhabad

ITA 159/AGR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0727 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 16-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 29-07-2013
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S D SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: S K GUPTA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA (SMC) BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 159/AGRA/2013 ASSTT. YEAR : 2008-09 NARENDRA KUMAR RAJEEV KUMAR, D.C.I.T., CIRCLE 2( 1), MATHIA DEVI, RAILWAY ROAD, FARRUKHABAD. FARRUKHABAD. (PAN: AAAFN 8797 R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.K. GUPTA, C.A. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.D. SHARMA, JR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 29.07.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER : 31.07.2013 ORDER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), MUZAFFARNAGAR DATED 06.03.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2008-09, CHALLENGING THE ADDITION OF RS.50,000/-. 2. THE AO FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED EXPE NSES OF RS.58,16,830/- UNDER THE HEAD HANDLING AND TRANSPORT EXPENSES. O N VERIFICATION, IT WAS FOUND THAT MOSTLY, PAYMENT TO TRUCK AND TRACTOR OWNERS HA VE BEEN MADE IN CASH. THE CASH RECEIPTS DO NOT SHOW THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF THE RECIPIENTS. THEREFORE, CROSS- VERIFICATION AND GENUINENESS OF THE PAYMENTS WERE N OT SUBJECTED TO VERIFICATION. THE AO DISALLOWED RS.1,00,000/-. IT WAS CONTENDED B EFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE COPIES OF THE LEDGER ACCOUNT AND OTHER PARTICULARS SHOWING IDENTITY OF THE PAYEES WERE FILED WHICH WERE AS PER PREVAILING TRADE PRACT ICE. THEREFORE, ADHOC ADDITION IS UNJUSTIFIED. THE LD. CIT(A) IN PRINCIPLE ACCEPTED T HAT THE PAYMENTS ARE NOT ITA NO. 159/AGRA/2013 2 SUBJECTED TO VERIFICATION, HOWEVER, CONSIDERING IT TO BE ADDITION ON HIGHER SIDE, REDUCED THE DISALLOWANCE TO RS.50,000/-. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PER USED THE DETAILS FURNISHED IN THE PAPER BOOK AND DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICATION TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN REDUCING THE ADDITION TO RS.50,000/-. THE OBJECTION OF THE AO THAT THE CASH RECEIPTS DO NOT SHOW NAMES AND ADDRESSES O F THE RECIPIENTS AND ARE NOT SUBJECTED TO CROSS-VERIFICATION, HAVE NOT BEEN MET BY THE ASSESSEE. THE COPIES OF THE CASH RECEIPTS ARE FILED IN THE PAPER BOOK, WHIC H SUPPORT THE FINDINGS OF THE AO THAT NO NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF THE RECIPIENTS HAVE BEEN MENTIONED. THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE HUGE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION OF EXPENDITURE, TH EREFORE, DISALLOWANCE OF RS.50,000/- OUT OF THE SAME IS VERY MINOR ADDITION AND DO NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE, THEREFORE, DISMISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A), CONCERNED BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY TRUE COPY