1 ITA NO.1913/KOL/2016 AMZAD ALI KHAN A.Y.2012-13 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH D KOL KATA [BEFORE HONBLE SHRI P.M.JAGTAP, AM & SHRI S.S.VI SWANETHRA RAVI, JM ] ITA NO.1913/KOL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 I.T.O., WARD-2(3) -VERSUS- AMZAD ALI KHAN DURGAPUR KOLKATA (PAN: AETPK 7846K) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT: SHRI ARINDAM BHATTCHARJEE, A DDL. CIT FOR THE RESPONDENT: NONE DATE OF HEARING : 12.02.2018. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28.03.2018. ORDER PER S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 14.07.2016 PASSED BY C.I.T-(A)-DURGAPUR FOR A.Y.2012-13. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE IS TO BE DECIDED AS TO WHETHER T HE CIT(A) IS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF CASH PAYMENTS IN V IOLATION OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (ACT) IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUM STANCES OF THE CASE. 3. THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO. WE FI ND THAT THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION FILED BY THE LD. AR BY STATING THAT HE WAS UNABLE TO REPRESENT THE CASE BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL AS WAS ENTRUSTED TO HIM YESTER DAY I.E. 11.02.2018. ON PERUSAL OF THE RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED BY VA RIOUS ORDERS OF THIS TRIBUNAL INCLUDING THE LEADING CASE IN THE CASE OF AMRAI PA CHWAI & C.S.SHOP VS DCIT IN ITA NO.1251/KOL/2011 ORDER DATED 15.01.2014. THEREFORE WE REJECT THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION FILED BY THE AR AND PROCEEDED TO DISPOS E OF THE APPEAL, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE MATERIAL FACTS ON RECORD. 2 ITA NO.1913/KOL/2016 AMZAD ALI KHAN A.Y.2012-13 4. HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED MATERIAL ON RECORD. IT IS NOTICED THAT THE AO FOUND FROM THE STATEMENT RECEIVED FROM UNITED BA NK OF INDIA, MAYABAZAR BRANCH THAT THE ASSESSEE PAID AN AMOUNT OF RS.2,33,23,967/ - IN CASH TO IFB AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD AND NON PRODUCTION OF ANY EVIDENCE SHOWING THAT THE SAID PAYMENTS WERE MADE IN ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE OR BANK DRAFT AND FOR VIOLATIO N OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT, THE AFORESAID AMOUNT WAS BROUGHT TO TAX BY THE AO. BEFORE THE CIT(A) IT WAS CONTENDED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE CA SH PAYMENTS WERE MADE TO IFB AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD, PANAGARH BAZAR, BUDBUD AS PER THE COMPLIANCES TO BE MADE WITH WEST BENGAL EXCISE (SUPPLY OF COUNTRY SPIRIT ON PAY MENT OF DUTY) RULES, 2005 AND IT IS A CREDIT TO THE AGENT OF THE STATE GOVERNMENT AN D AS SUCH PAYMENTS ARE COVERED BY THE EXCEPTIONS CONTAINED IN RULE 6DD (B) OF INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 THAT THE ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES IN THE CASE OF AMRAI PACHWAI & C.S. SHOP VS DCIT (SUPRA) HELD THAT RULE 6DD(B) IS APPLICABLE THAT IF THE PAYMENTS M ADE TO THE GOVERNMENT AGENT IN LEGAL TENDER UNDER THE RULES FRAMED BY IT AND CONSI DERING THE SAME AND TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE THAT THE ASSESSEE PURCHASED COUNTRY LIQUOR AND COUNTRY SPIRIT FROM THE TERRITOR IAL LICENSEE BOTTLING PLANT IFB AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD AND PAYMENTS IN CASH MADE THERETO IS PROTECTED BY THE EXEMPTION IN TERMS OF RULE 6DD(B) OF INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 AS P ER THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT. IN VIEW OF THE SAME, WE FIND NO INFIRM ITY IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AS THE GROUNDS 1 TO 5 RAISED IN THE APPEAL BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DISMI SSED. O RDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28.03.2018. SD/- SD/- [P.M.JAGTAP] [ S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBE R DATED : 28.03.2018. [RG SR.PS] 3 ITA NO.1913/KOL/2016 AMZAD ALI KHAN A.Y.2012-13 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1.AMZAD ALI KHAN, MAYABAZAR C.S.SHOP, DURGAPUR, BUR DWAN-713207. 2. AI.T.O., WARD-2(3), DURGAPUR. 3. C.I.T.(A)-DURGAPUR. 4. C.I.T.-DU RGAPUR. 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER, SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY HEAD OF OFFICE/D.D.O., ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES