M/s Shreeji Builders, RAIPUR (CG) V. Add.CIT,Rang -2, RAIPUR (CG)

ITA 205/BIL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0206 (ITAT-RAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 10 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-11-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 17-12-2012
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 32; 147; 131; 68; 246; 69; 145; 27; 148; 54; 37; 6; 56; 263; 63; 132; 12; 28; 144; 10; 90; 154; 2; 11; 15; 271(1)(b); 139; 92; 13

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO. 205/BLPR/2012 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. (S.M.C.) I.T.A. NO.205/BLPR/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005 - 06. M/S SHREEJI BUILDERS, ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, RAIPUR. VS. RANGE - 2, RAIPUR. PAN AA YFS1899P. APPELLANT. RESPONDENT. APPELLANT BY : SHRI S UNIL KUMAR AGRAWAL. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AJIT KUMAR LASKAR. DATE OF HEARING : 17 - 10 - 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 2 ND NOV. 2016. O R D E R. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(APPEALS), RAIPUR DATED 20 - 09 - 2012 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06. THE GROUND OF APPEAL READ S AS UNDER : 1. ON THE FACTS & IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. A.O. ERRED IN DISALLOWING RS.1,50,000/ - BEING PROVISIONS FOR GARDEN DEVELOPMENT AND THE LD. CIT[A], RAIPUR GROSSLY ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE SAME WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS IN IS RIGHT PERSPECTIVE. YOUR PETITIONER SUBMITS THAT THE ABOVE EXPENDITURE BEING GENUINE AND INCIDENTAL TO THE BUSINESS DESERVES TO BE ALLOWED. 2. IN THIS CASE THE ASSESSEE FIRM IS A CIVIL CONTRACTOR AND BUILDER. IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT THE AO MADE A DISALLOWANCE OF RS.1,50,000/ - BEING THE PROVISION FOR GARDEN DEVELOPMENT EXPENSES. THE AO NOT ED THAT NO GARDEN DEVELOPMENT EXPENSE HAS BEEN INCURRED UPTO FINANCIAL YEAR 2006 - 07. 3. UPON ASSESSEES APPEAL LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION. 2 ITA NO. 205/BLPR/2012 4. AGAINST THE ABOVE ORDER, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT. 5. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE COUN SEL AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE PROVISION FOR THE ABOVE EXPENDITURE WAS MADE AS PER PAST EXPERIENCE AND EXPENDITURE WAS ACTUALLY INCURRED IN FINANCIAL YEAR S 2007 - 08, 2008 - 09 AND 2009 - 10. FURTHER LEARNED COUNS EL SUBMITTED THAT DURING THE CURRENT ASSESSMENT YEAR PROPORTIONATE COST OF GARDEN DEVELOPMENT EXPENSES WERE INCLUDED IN WIP COST OF 13 ROW HOUSES. HENCE LEARNED COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE PROVISION SHOULD NOT BE DISALLOWED. 6. PER CONTRA LEARNED D.R. RELIE D UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 7. UPON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION I FIND THAT THE SUBMISSION OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE NEEDS FACTUAL VERIFICATION ON THE PART OF THE AO. HENCE I REMIT THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO. THE AO IS DIRECTED TO EXAMINE THE FACTUAL VERACITY OF ASSESSEES SUBMISSION AND DECIDE AS PER LAW. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 2 ND DAY NOV., 2016. SD/ - ( SHAMI M YAHYA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. DATED: 2 ND NOV., 2016. 3 ITA NO. 205/BLPR/2012 COPY FORWARDED TO : 1. M/S SHREEJI BUILDERS, VIKAS VILLA, OPP. C.M. BUNGALOW, CIVIL LINES, RAIPUR (CHHATISGARH). 2. ADDL. C.I.T., RANGE - 2, RAIPUR. 3. C.I.T., RAIPUR. 4. CIT(APPEALS), RAIPUR. 5. D.R., ITAT, RAIPUR. 6. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGIS TRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WAKODE.