Rajesh Baslingappa Sanikop, Kolhapur V. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Ichalkaranji Circle, Ichalkaranji

ITA 1669/PUN/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6043 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-09-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 03-07-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VISHAL A MAKAWANE
• Assessee Lawyers: N O N E
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 133(6); 143(2); 22; 131; 12

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, J UDICIAL MEMBER . / ITA NO.1 669 /PUN/201 7 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 11 RAJESH BASLINGAPPA SANIKOP, 91, NEELAM JAYPRAKASH HOUSING SOCIETY, JAYSINGPUR, TAL. - SHIROL, DIST. - KOLHAPUR PAN : ALPPS1299H ....... / APPELLANT / V/S. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ICHALKARANJI / RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : N O N E REVENUE BY : SHRI VISHAL A. MAKAWANE / DATE OF HEARING : 22 - 09 - 2020 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28 - 0 9 - 2020 / ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24 - 04 - 2017 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 2, KOLHAPUR [CIT(A)] FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11 . 2 ITA NO . 1669/PUN/2017, A.Y. 2010 - 11 2. WE FIND NO REPRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION FILED SEEKING ADJOURNMENT. THUS, THE ASSESSEE CALLED ABSENT AND SET EX - PARTE. THEREFORE WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE CASE BY H EARING THE LD. DR AND PERUSING THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3. THE ASSESSEE RAISED TWO GROUNDS AMONGST WHICH THE ONLY ISSUE ARISES FOR OUR CONSIDERATION IS AS TO WHETHER THE CIT(A) JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION TO AN EXTENT OF RS.7,03,000/ - IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 4. THE FACTS RELATING TO THE ISSUE ON HAND ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL FILED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.51,70,110/ - . UNDER SCRUTINY NOTICES U/S. 143(2) AND 142(1) WERE ISSUED. IN RESPONSE TO WHICH AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARED BEFORE THE AO AND PRODUCED REQUIRED DETAILS AS SOUGHT BY THE AO. ACCORDING TO AO, THE ASSESSEE DEBITED SALES COMMISSION OF RS.18,73,000/ - TOWARDS 8 PERSONS. THE AO ASKED THE A SSESSEE TO FURNISH THE DETAILS SUCH AS NAME OF PERSONS, AMOUNT OF COMMISSION PAID. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THE DETAILS OF SUCH 8 PERSONS. IN ORDER TO VERIFY, THE AO ISSUED NOTICE U/S. 133(6) ALONG WITH SUMMONS U/S. 131 TO ALL THE ABOVE 8 PERSONS. ACCORDI NG TO AO SOME PERSONS SUBMITTED THE INFORMATION AND NOT ATTENDED ON GIVEN DATE FOR EXAMINATION. THEREBY, THE AO ADDED AN AMOUNT OF RS.18,73,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF SALES COMMISSION VIDE THIS ORDER DATED 24 - 12 - 2012 U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT. THE CIT(A) RESTRICTE D THE SAID ADDITION TO AN EXTENT OF RS.7,03,000/ - . AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE US. 3 ITA NO . 1669/PUN/2017, A.Y. 2010 - 11 5. HEARD THE LD. DR, SHRI VISHAL A. MAKAWANE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE LD. DR SUBMITS THAT THE AO IN ASSESSMENT PRO CEEDINGS ISSUED NOTICE U/S. 133(6) AND SUMMONS U/S. 131 OF THE ACT BUT , EXCEPT FEW , NO SUCH OTHER PERSONS MENTIONED IN THE TABLE OF AOS ORDER APPEARED BEFORE THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE AO HAS GIVEN AMPLE TIME TO ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE SUCH PE RSONS TO EXAMINE THE NATURE OF WORK AND COMMISSION PAID BUT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT BRING THEM BEFORE THE AO AND RIGHTLY ADDED THE SAME TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF ASSESSEE. THE CIT(A) ACCEPTED THE SUBMISSIONS OF ASSESSEE AND GIVING NO OPPORTUNITY TO THE AO RES TRICTED THE ADDITION TO AN EXTENT OF RS.7,03,000/ - . 6. WE NOTE THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRODUCE THE SAID PERSONS FOR EXAMINATION BEFORE THE AO AND THE AO HAVING NO CONFIRMATIONS FROM THE SAID PARTIES MADE TO ADD ENTIRE AMOUNT TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF ASS ESSEE BUT IN THE FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS THE CIT(A) CALLED FOR COMPLETE DETAILS OF THE COMMISSION PAID TO THE SAID PARTIES. THE CIT(A) EXAMINED THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES WHICH WERE ALREADY THERE BEFORE THE AO. WE NOTE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED CONFIRMA TIONS FROM 7 PARTIES ALONG WITH COMMISSION AGREEMENT BEFORE THE AO BUT THE AO FOR NON - APPEARANCE OF SUCH PARTIES PROCEEDED TO ADD SAID AMOUNT TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF ASSESSEE. THE CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED CONFIRMATIONS AND AGENCY COMMISS ION AGREEMENT OF 7 PARTIES ALONG WITH THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME OF 4 PARTIES OUT OF 7 PERSONS. THE LD. DR DID NOT DISPUTE AND BRING ON RECORD ANY EVIDENCE TO SHOW THE FINDING OF CIT(A) IS INCORRECT. THE CIT(A) ALSO OBSERVED THAT THERE WAS NO CONFIRMATION S OR DETAILS REGARDING THE JIGNESH S. AJMERA AT SL. NO. 1 O N THE RECORD. WE NOTE THAT THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE 4 ITA NO . 1669/PUN/2017, A.Y. 2010 - 11 BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL TO SUBSTANTIATE THE COMMISSION PAID TO JIGNESH S. AJMERA. THEREFORE, HAVING NO EVIDENCE REGARDING THE COMMISSION PAID TO THE SAID PERSON , T HE ADDITION MADE AGAINST THE COMMISSION PAID TO JIGNESH S. AJMERA IS SUSTAINED. THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND IT IS UPHELD. THUS, THE ONLY ISSUE IN GROUND NOS. 1 AND 2 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSE D. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 TH SEPTEMBER, 2020 . SD/ - SD/ - ( R.S. SYAL ) ( S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI ) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER / PUNE; / DATED : 28 TH SEPTEMBER, 2020. RK / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT. 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A) - 2, KOLHAPUR 4. THE PR. CIT - 2, KOLHAPUR 5. , , , / DR, ITAT, B BENCH, PUNE. 6. / GUARD FILE. // // TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / PRIVATE SECRETARY, , / ITAT, PUNE