B.Kalaiyarasu, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1732/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8666 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 06-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 17-06-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A V SREEKANTH
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Salary income; Revised return
• Section: 143(3); 148

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI , . , BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I T.A. NO. 1732/MDS/2014 / ASSESSMENT YEAR :20 01 - 0 2 SHRI B. KALAIYARASU, 8, BAYWATCH BOULEWARD WATER LAND DRIVE, CHENNAI 600 0 41 . [PAN: A AQPK2068Q ] VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , COMPANY C IRCLE I II ( 4 ) , CHENNAI 600 0 34 . ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI S . SRIDHAR , ADVOCATE / RESPONDENT BY : S HRI A.V. SREEKANTH , J CIT / DATE OF HEARING : 0 6 . 0 6 .201 6 / DATE OF P RONOUNCEMENT : 24 . 0 8 .201 6 / O R D E R PER DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) III, CHENN AI , DATED 28 . 02 .20 1 4 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 0 1 - 0 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING EFFECTIVE GROUNDS: (I) THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING VACANCY ALLOWANCE DISALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. I.T.A. NO . 1732 /M/ 14 2 (II) THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING T HE ADDITION MADE TOWARDS CASH CREDIT OF .5 LAKHS RECEIVED FROM SHRI K. RAJ RELATIVE OF ASSESSEE S MOTHER AND .5 LAKHS RECEIVED FROM ASSESSEE S MOTHER. (III) THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF .1,91,229/ - BEING THE REMITTANCES FROM SINGAPORE. (IV) THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CON FIRMING THE ADDITION OF .3,75,825 BEING THE MONIES WITHDRAWN FROM M/S. VICTORY SHIPPING P. LTD. [NOT PRESSED]. 2. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS FOUND TO HAVE BEEN FILED LATE BY ONE DAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. BY PLEADING THE REASONS STATED IN THE PETITION , THE LD. A R HAS REQUESTED FOR CONDONING THE DELAY AND TO ADMIT THE APPEAL FOR HEARING. THE LD. DR HAS NOT SERIOUSLY OBJECT TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSES SEE . ACCORDINGLY, WE CONDONE THE DELAY OF ONE DAY IN FILING THE APPEAL AND ADMIT THE APPEAL FOR HEARING. 3 .1 BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND DIRECTOR IN M/S. VICTORY SHIPPING AGENCIES P. LTD. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 21.03.2002 DECLARING AN INCOME OF .6,60,000/ - . SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSEE FILED A BELATED REVISED RETURN ON 05.04.2006 ADMITTING INCOME OF .10,35,825/ - . THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REOPENED BY ISSUING NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 [ ACT IN SHORT] ON 13.03.2007. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE ACT ON 20.12.2007 DETERMINING THE TOTAL INCOME AT .40,52,690/ - AFTER MAKING VARIOUS ADDITIONS. I.T.A. NO . 1732 /M/ 14 3 3 .2 ON APPEAL, A FTER CONSIDERING THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE LD. CIT(A), PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 3.3 ON BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4 . WE HAV E HEARD BOTH SIDES, PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. WITH REGARD TO THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION FOR VACANCY ALLOWANCE, BY REITERATING THE SUBMISSIONS AS MADE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE PROPERTY OF THE ASSESSEE WAS PARTLY VACANT AND PARTLY LET OUT FOR SIX MONTHS . AFTER CONSIDERING THE LEASE AGREEMENT ALONG WITH PAYMENT ADVICE FROM M/S. PIZZA CORNER PVT. LTD. FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) , THE LD. CIT(A) HAS O BSERVED AND HELD AS UNDER: THE FACTS HAVE BEEN CAREFULLY CONSIDERED ALONG WITH THE DETAILS PRODUCED. NO DOUBT THE APPELLANT HAS FURNISHED LEASE AGREEMENT COPY ALONG WITH PAYMENT ADVICE FROM M/S. PIZZA CORNER PVT. LTD. THE ISSUE IS WHETHER THE SAID PROPERT Y WAS OCCUPIED OR NOT FOR THE BALANCE PERIOD BETWEEN OCTOBER 2000 TO MARCH 2001. IN THE LEASE AGREEMENT THOUGH SOME NOTINGS HAVE BEEN MADE INDICATING DEPOSIT: .4 LAKHS, RENTAL JAN/FEB: .80,000, SWIMMING POOL DEC/JAN/FEB: .6,000, H OLD PAYMENT : .50,000, TOTALLING TO .1,36,000 BELOW WHICH IT I S WRITTEN LESS 4 LAKHS . THE APPELLANT HAD NOT BEEN ABLE TO CLARIFY WHAT ARE THESE. FURTHER AS MENTIONED ABOVE RENTAL JAB/FEB .80000, IN THE ABSENCE OF YEAR MENTIONED IT CAN BE PRESUMED, SUBJECT TO REBUTTAL BY THE A PPELLANTS AR THAT THE SAID PROPERTY WAS OCCUPIED EVEN SUBSEQUENT TO OCT 2000 AND IN THE NEXT LINE SWIMMING POOL (DEC/JAN/FEB) ALSO INDICATES THE PROPERTY WAS OCCUPIED SUBSEQUENT TO OCT 2000. THERE WAS NO CLARIFICATION WITH REGARD TO THESE NOTINGS, HENCE TH E VACANCY I.T.A. NO . 1732 /M/ 14 4 ALLOWANCE CLAIMED, DISALLOWED BY THE AO IS UPHELD. THE GROUND IS DISMISSED. SINCE T HE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO CLARIFY WITH REGARD TO THE ABOVE NOTINGS FOUND IN THE LEASE AGREEMENT, THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER. BEFORE US, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED ANY PIECE OF PAPER FOR VERIFICATION AND TO TAKE DIFFERENT VIEW. THUS, THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 5 . THE NEXT GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS WITH REGARD TO THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF .5 LAKHS STATED TO HAVE RECEIVED FROM SHRI K. RAJ, RELATIVE OF ASSESSEE S MOTHER AN D . 5 LAKHS FROM ASSESSEE S MOTHER . THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT IN THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME, THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED THAT HE RECEIVED .5 LAKHS FROM K. RAJ , RELA TIVE OF ASSESSEE S MOTHER. WHEN THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO PRODUCE ADDRESS OF K. RAJ, MODE OF RECEIPT, CONFIRMATION LETTER AND ASSESSMENT DETAILS OF K. RAJ, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE ANYTHING BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. WITH REGARD TO THE AMOUNT OF .5 LAKHS STATED TO HAVE RECEIVED FROM ASSESSEE S MOTHER ALSO THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRODUCE ANY DETAILS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED BOTH THE AMOUNTS AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AND ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCO ME OF THE ASSESSEE. ON APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS PRODUCED CONFIRMATION TOWARDS AMOUNTS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE SAME, THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY HOLDING THAT THE I.T.A. NO . 1732 /M/ 14 5 ASSESSEE HAS FIL ED A BLAND CONFIRMATION . WE ARE UNABLE TO UNDERSTAND AS TO UNDER WHAT CONDITION THE CONFIRMATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS WEAK OR IT SHOULD BE SOUND. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY COPY OF THE CONFIRMATION FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), WE REMIT BOTH T HE ISSUES BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY THE SAME AND DECIDE AFTER ALLOWING OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO PRODUCE NECESSARY EVIDENCES BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR VERIFICATION. BOTH THE GROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. THE NEXT GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS WITH REGARD TO SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF .1,91,229/ - BEING THE REMITTANCES FROM SINGAPORE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS OBSERVED FROM THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT THA T THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED AN AMOUNT OF .19,26,730 BEING RECEIPTS FROM SINGAPORE, OUT OF WHICH .17,22,725/ - CONSTITUTES THE SALARY INCOME FROM RCL FEEDER (P) LTD. THE DIFFERENCE AMOUNT OF .19,26,730 .17,22,725 = .1,91,229/ - HAS BEEN CLAIMED AS NON TAXABLE AMOUNT. WHEN THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO PRODUCE BANK ACCOUNT COPY FOR VERIFICATION, HE HAS NOT FURNISHED ANY DETAILS TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIM OF NON TAXABILITY. HENCE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADDED THE SAME TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. ON APP EAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED ANY DETAILS TO SUPPORT HIS CLAIM. THUS, HE CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. EVEN ON FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT I.T.A. NO . 1732 /M/ 14 6 FILED ANY DETAILS TO SUBSTANTIATE HI S CLAIM OF NON TAXABILITY. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE FOR THE CLAIM OF NON TAXABILITY, WE DO UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRM ING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THUS, THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 7. THE NEXT GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS WITH REGARD TO CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION OF .3,75,825/ - BEING THE MONIES WITHDRAWN FROM M/S. VICTORY SHIPPING P. LTD. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, BY MAKING ENDORSEMENT IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AS NOT PRESSED , THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE GROUND RAISED IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL IS NOT PRESSED. ACCORDINGLY, THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 8 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTIC AL PURPOSES . ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 24 TH AUGUST, 201 6 AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( DUVVURU RL REDDY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 24 . 0 8 .201 6 VM/ - / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT , 2. / RESPONDENT , 3. ( ) / CIT(A) , 4. / CIT , 5. / DR & 6. / GF.