DCIT, Ludhiana V. Sh. Rajiv Gopal Sood Prop, Malerkotla

ITA 168/CHANDI/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8454 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 07-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 11-02-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGH
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH,CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI H.L.KARWA, HONBLE VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. RANO JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 168/CHD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 THE DCIT, VS SHRI RAJIV GOPAL SOOD, CIRCLE IV, PROP. M/S KPM INTERNATIONA L, LUDHIANA. SOOD HOUSE, DHURI ROAD, MALERKOTLA. PAN: ABMPG6739P & ITA NO. 1152/CHD/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 SHRI RAJIV GOPAL SOOD, VS THE DCIT, PROP. M/S KPM INTERNATIONAL, RANGE-IV, SOOD HOUSE, LUDHIANA. DHURI ROAD, MALERKOTLA. PAN: ABMPG6739P & ITA NO. 1170/CHD/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 THE DCIT, VS SHRI RAJIV GOPAL SOOD, CIRCLE IV, PROP. M/S KPM INTERNATIONA L, LUDHIANA. SOOD HOUSE, DHURI ROAD, MALERKOTLA. PAN: ABMPG6739P DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ASHWANI KUMAR DATE OF HEARING : 17.02.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18.02.2016 O R D E R PER H.L.KARWA,V.P. THESE THREE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OFF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAK E OF CONVENIENCE. 2 ITA 1170/CHD/2009 2. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGA INST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS)-II, LUDHIANA DATED 22.09.2009 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. ITA 168/CHD/2011 3. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGA INST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS)-II LUDHIANA DATED 07.12.2010 IN CANCELING THE PENALTY OF RS. 3,20,979 /- UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT FOR T HE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 4. IT IS OBSERVED THAT IN EACH CASE REFERRED TO ABO VE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY LIMIT O F RS. 10 LAKHS. THUS, IN VIEW OF CIRCULAR NO. 21/2015 DATED 10.12.2015,F.NO.279/MISC.142/2007-ITJ(PT),GOVERNMEN T OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENU E, CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, THE INSTANT APPEAL DESERVES TO BE TREATED AS WITHDRAWN / NOT PRESSED. VIDE PARA 10 OF THE ABOVE INSTRUCTIONS, THE CBDT HAS CLA RIFIED THAT THIS INSTRUCTION WILL APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN ITAT. THE CBDT HAS FURTHER CLARIFIED THAT THE PENDING APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMITS I.E. RS. 10 LAKHS MAY BE WITHDRAWN / NOT PRESSED BY THE REVENUE. IT IS ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE ISSUES INVOLV ED IN THESE APPEALS ARE NOT COVERED BY PARA 8 OF THE ABOV E 3 INSTRUCTIONS. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE TREATED AS WITHDRAWN / NOT PRESSED. 5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. ITA 1152/CHD/2009 6. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS)-II LUDHIANA DATED 22.09.2 009 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. IN THIS APPEA L, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. THAT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 250(6) BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IS AGAINST LAW AND FACTS ON THE FI LE IN AS MUCH AS HE WAS NOT JUSTIFIED TO A4RBITRARILY UPH OLD ACTION OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER IN REJECTING TH E BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND ESTIMATING THE NP RATE @ 2.5% AS AGAINST DECLARED AT 1.8% THEREBY UPHOLDING THE ADDITION AT RS. 2,79,085/-. 2. THAT THE LD. C1T (A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED TO UPHOL D THE ACTION OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER IN: (A) DISALLOWING A SUM OF RS. 59,718/- OUT OF TRAVELING EXPENSES OF RS. 6,14,068/- (B) DISALLOWING A SUM OF RS. 1,62,647/- OUT OF REPAIRS TO BUILDING ACCOUNT. (C) DISALLOWING A SUM OF RS. 74,710/- OUT OF RS. 80,652/- INCURRED ON ACCOUNT OF PERSONAL EXPENDITURE RELATED TO CAR, TELEPHONE ETC. (D) DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 12,524/-OUT OF INTEREST. 3. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS FURTHER NOT JUSTIFIED T O ARBITRARILY UPHOLD DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 2,99,259/- O UT OF INTEREST BY RESORT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 36( I)(III). 7. AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, SHRI ASHWA NI KUMAR, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRESS T HE 4 ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY, WE DISMISS T HE APPEAL AS NOT PRESSED. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18 TH FEBRUARY, 2016. SD/- SD/- (RANO JAIN) (H. L.KARWA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DATED: 18 TH FEBRUARY, 2016. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT/CHD