Smt Sangeeta Gaikwad , Raichur V. Income Tax Officer Ward-1 , Raichur

ITA 1617/BANG/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5611 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-01-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 28-07-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR G MANOJ KUMAR
• Keywords: Gift
• Section: 234B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC-A BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1617 / BANG/201 7 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 1 2 - 1 3 SMT. SANGEETA GAIKWAD, H.NO. 1-4-1215, IDSMT LAYOUT, RAICHUR 584 101. PA N: BARPS 0617R VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD (1), RAICHUR. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : DR. G. MANOJKUMAR, ADDL. CIT (DR) D ATE OF HEARING : 10 .01.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 1 1 .0 1 .201 8 O R D E R PER SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS DIREC TED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) GULBARGA DATED 23.05.2017 FOR ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2012-13. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER. 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX APPEALS, PASSED UNDER SECTION 250 OF THE ACT IN SO FAR AS IT IS AGAINST THE APPELLANT IS OPPOSED TO LAW, EQUITY, WEIGHT OF EVID ENCE, PROBABILITIES AND THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES IN THE APPELLANT'S CASE. 2. THE APPELLANT DENIES HIMSELF LIABLE TO BE ASSESS ED AT A TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 4,72,130/-AS DETERMINED BY THE LEARNED AO AS AGAINST THE TOTAL INCOME DECLARED BY THE APPELLANT OF RS. 1,04,510/- ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,21,944/- ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN TURNOVER VAL UE OF SHARES IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANC ES OF THE CASE. 4. THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ADDITION OF RS. ITA NO.1617/BANG/2017 PAGE 2 OF 4 2,300/- ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN VALUATION OF CL OSING STOCK OF SHARES IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS AND CIRC UMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 5. THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ADDITION OF RS. 86,300/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNDER-VALUATION OF CLOSING S TOCK OF SHARES IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMS TANCES OF THE CASE. 6. THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,300/- ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN VALUATION OF CL OSING STOCK OF SHARES IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS AND CIRC UMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 7. THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 7,200/- ON ACCOUNT OF VEHICLE MAINTENANCE IS NOT SU STAINABLE IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 8. THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 6,764/- ON ACCOUNT OF VARIOUS EXPENDITURES IS NOT S USTAINABLE IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 9. THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ADDITION OF RS. 3,50,000/- BY DENYING THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION ON ACC OUNT OF GIFT RECEIVED IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 10. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE RIGHT TO SEEK WAIVER W ITH THE HON'BLE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THE APPELLANT COM PANY DENIES ITSELF LIABLE TO BE CHARGED TO INTEREST UNDER SECTI ONS 234B OF THE ACT. THE CALCULATION OF INTEREST UNDER SECTIONS 234B IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AS THE RATE, AMOUNT AND METHOD FOR CALCULA TING INTEREST IS NOT DISCERNIBLE FROM THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT. 11. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, DELET E OR SUBSTITUTE ANY OF THE GROUNDS URGED ABOVE. 12. IN THE VIEW OF THE ABOVE AND OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL, THE APPELLAN T PRAYS THAT THE APPEAL MAY BE ALLOWED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AN D EQUITY. 3. THIS APPEAL WAS EARLIER FIXED FOR HEARING ON TWO OCCASIONS I.E. ON 14.11.2017 AND 27.11.2017. ON BOTH THESE DATES, THE LD. AR OF ASSESSEE SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT AS PER LETTERS DATED 14.11.2017 AND 27. 11.2017 AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ON BOTH THESE DATES, THE HEARING WAS ADJOU RNED ON THE REQUEST OF THE LD. AR OF ASSESSEE TO 27.11.2017 ON THE FIRST OCCAS ION AND TO 10.01.2018 ON THE SECOND OCCASION. ON THE LAST DATE OF HEARING I .E. 10.01.2018, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND THERE IS NO REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT. ITA NO.1617/BANG/2017 PAGE 3 OF 4 UNDER THIS FACTUAL POSITION, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSE SSEE WAS HEARD EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. DR OF REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DR OF REVENUE AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. I FIND THAT THE I SSUES IN DISPUTE ARE REGARDING ADDITION OF RS. 1,21,944/- ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN TURNOVER VALUE OF SHARES, RS. 2,300/- ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN VALUATION O F CLOSING STOCK OF SHARES, RS. 86,300/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNDER-VALUATION OF CLOSING S TOCK OF SHARES. IN ADDITION TO THESE, THERE ARE CERTAIN OTHER DISALLOWANCES / ADDI TIONS SUCH AS RS. 7,200/- BEING DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF VEHICLE MAINTENANC E, RS. 6,764/- BEING DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF VARIOUS EXPENSES AND RS. 3.50 LAKHS BEING ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF GIFT CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN RE CEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. AS PER THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF CIT(A), IT IS SEEN THAT C ATEGORICAL FINDING HAS BEEN GIVEN BY CIT(A) ON PAGE NO. 3 OF HIS ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY DETAILED SUBMISSIONS OR STATEMENT OF FACTS OF ITS C ASE TO EXPLAIN THE APPEAL. ON PAGE NO. 4 OF HIS ORDER ALSO, A CATEGORICAL FINDING HAS BEEN GIVEN BY CIT(A) THAT REGARDING ADDITION OF RS. 3.50 LAKHS ON ACCOUNT OF GIFTS RECEIVED ALSO, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SUBMITTED ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE S WHICH ARE CONVINCING TO PROVE THE RECEIPT OF THE GIFT DURING THE ASSESSM ENT PROCEEDINGS OR APPEAL PROCEEDINGS. BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ALSO, THE ASSESSE E HAD NEITHER FILED THE PAPER BOOK NOR WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS AND HAS NOT APPEARED O N THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING AFTER TAKING ADJOURNMENT TWICE. HENCE I FI ND NO REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF CIT (A). 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENT IONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/- (ARUN KUMAR GARODIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 11 TH JANUARY, 2018. /MS/ ITA NO.1617/BANG/2017 PAGE 4 OF 4 COPY TO: 1. APP ELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE.