Rishabchand Misrimalji Bhansali (HUF), Bangalore V. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 1847/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8846 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 20-06-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A V SREEKANTH J
• Assessee Lawyers: K RAVI
• Keywords: Reopening of assessment; Business expenditure; Bad and doubtful debts
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : CHENNAI , . !' BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G.PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.1847/MDS./2016 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 M/S.RISHABCHAND MISRIMALJI BHANSALI (HUF), NO.10/1,NAMBOOR MARKET, T.N.SETTY LANE, AVENUE ROAD CROSS, BANGALORE 560 053. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD 6(1), CHENNAI 600 034. [PAN AAEPR 5875 Q ] ( #$ / APPELLANT) ( %&#$ /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR.K.RAVI,ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : MR.A.V.SREEKANTH,JCIT,DR / DATE OF HEARING : 12 - 07 - 201 6 !' / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15 - 07 - 2016 ' / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-5, CHENNAI DA TED 13.04.2016 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR2006-07. ITA NO.1847/MDS./16 :- 2 -: 2. THE FIRST GROUND IN THIS APPEAL IS WITH REGARD TO VALIDITY OF REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, TH E LD.A.R MADE AN ENDORSEMENT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT WANTED TO PRE SS THIS GROUND. ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSE D . 3. THE NEXT GROUND IS WITH REGARD TO NOT ALLOWING BAD DEBTS OF ` 9 LAKHS AS A BUSINESS EXPENDITURE. 4. THE FACTS OF THE ISSUE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE CL AIMED AN AMOUNT OF ` 9 LAKHS AS BAD DEBTS. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PR ODUCED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, THE SAME WAS DISALLOWED BY THE A O. AGAINST THIS, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A ). ON APPEAL, LD.CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO . AGGRIEVE D BY THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD.A.R SUBMITTED TH AT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED BY AO AS EXPARTE U/S.144 R.W.S 147 OF THE ACT. HE PRAYED FOR GIVING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVE THE DEBTS AS BAD DEBT WHICH WAS ACTUALLY WRITTEN OFF. CONSIDERING THE FAC TS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE CONCEDE THE REQUEST OF THE LD.A.R. ACCORDINGLY, WE REMIT THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF LD. ASSESSING OFFICE R WITH A DIRECTION TO GIVE HIM ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. WITH THIS OBSERVATION, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATIS TICAL PURPOSES. ITA NO.1847/MDS./16 :- 3 -: 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS P ARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 15 TH JULY, 2016, AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - ( . ) ( G.PAVAN KUMAR ) / JUDICIAL MEMBER ( ) (CHANDRA POOJARI) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER #$ / CHENNAI %& / DATED: JULY, 2016 K S SUNDARAM &'(()*( +* / COPY TO: ( 1 . / APPELLANT 3. ( ,(- . / CIT(A) 5. */0 (1 / DR 2. / RESPONDENT 4. ( , / CIT 6. 02(3 / GF