L.Marimuthu, Trichy V. DCIT, Trichy

ITA 2076/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 81244 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-10-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 05-08-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A V SREEKANTH
• Assessee Lawyers: S KEERTHIRAJAN

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHE NNAI . . . , ! , ' # $ BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER . / I.T.A. NO. 2076/MDS/2014 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 SHRI L.MARIMUTHU, H.A.95, NAVALPATTU, ANNA NAGAR, TRICHY DIST., [PAN: AAKPM 0537 A] ( !% /APPELLANT) VS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-I(1) TRICHY ( &'!% /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.KEERTHIRAJAN, CA / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A.V.SREEKANTH, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 29-10-2014 ! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29-10-2014 #( / O R D E R PER VIKAS AWASTHY, J.M: THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), TIRUCHI RAPALLI DATED 09-04-2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2010-11. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS WORKING AS DY.GENERAL MANAGER IN BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LIMITED [BHEL], A GOVT. OF INDIA UNDERTAKING. I.T.A. NO. 2076/MDS/2014 2 THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE AY. 2010-11 ON 28-03-2012 DECLARING HIS TOTAL INCOME AS ` 11,18,199/-. DURING THE COURSE OF SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSING OFFICE R FIND THAT THERE IS DIFFERENCE OF AMOUNT IN INCOME RETURNED AN D FORM NO.26AS. THE ASSESSEE CLARIFIED THAT DIFFERENCE OF ` 1,71,621/- IS ON ACCOUNT OF REIMBURSEMENT OF CERTAIN EXPENSES THA T ARE NOT TAXABLE AND ARREARS OF SALARY WHICH HAS ALREADY BEE N ASSESSED IN THE AY.2009-10. NOT SATISFIED WITH THE EXPLANATION FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE ORDER DT.2 7-03-2013 MADE ADDITION OF ` 1,71,621/- IN THE INCOME RETURNED BY ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED BY THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSEE PR EFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS). THE CIT(APPEALS ) UPHELD THE FINDINGS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IMPUGNING THE F INDINGS OF FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THE ASSESSEE HAS COME IN SECON D APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 3. SHRI S.KEERTHIRAJAN, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIR MING THE ADDITION. THE AMOUNT REFLECTED IN FORM NO.26AS ARE ON ACCOUNT OF REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES TOTAL AMOUNTING TO ` 86,621/- AND SALARY REVISION AMOUNTING TO ` 85,000/-. THE REIMBURSEMENTS ARE NOT TAXABLE AND THE REVISED SALARY HAS ALREADY BEEN ASSESSED TO I.T.A. NO. 2076/MDS/2014 3 TAX IN THE AY.2009-10. BHEL HAS ALSO WRITTEN A LET TER TO INCOME TAX OFFICER, TRICHY STATING REASON FOR DIFFERENCE O F AMOUNT IN FORM NO.26AS AND FORM 16. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, SHRI A.V.SREEKANTH, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF CIT(APPEALS) AND PRAYED FOR DISMISSAL OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE SIDES. WE HAVE ALSO PE RUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE ASSESSEE IS A SALARIED EMPLOYEES OF BHEL, A GOVT. OF INDIA UNDERTAKING. A DDITION HAS BEEN MADE ONLY ON THE BASIS OF INCOME REFLECTED IN FORM NO.26AS. THE ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN MADE IN RESPECT O F THE FOLLOWING AMOUNTS: ` 1. CONVEYANCE REIMBURSEMENT 32,400 2. BOOKS & PERIODICALS REIMBURSEMENT 10,408 3. TELEPHONE EXPENSES REIMBURSEMENT 11,963 4. STITCHING CHARGES FOR UNIFORM 530 5. TRAVELLING EXPENSES PAID 8,620 6. UNIFORM WASHING ALLOWANCE 2,700 7. FESTIVAL ADVANCE 20,000 8. SALARY REVISION PAID FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 AND INCLUDED IN THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10 85,000 1,71,621 I.T.A. NO. 2076/MDS/2014 4 THE AMOUNTS MENTIONED AT SL.NO.1 TO 7 HEREIN ABOVE ARE IN RESPECT OF REIMBURSEMENTS AND ADVANCES WHICH ARE NO T TAXABLE. AS FAR AS ITEM NO.8 I.E., SALARY REVISION IS CONCER NED, THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY INCLUDED THE AMOUNT IN THE AY.2009-10. THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE ERRED IN MAKING THE ADDITION OF THE AFORESAID AMOUNTS. ACCORDINGLY, THE SAME ARE DIREC TED TO BE DELETED. THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS SET ASIDE AND THE A PPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF H EARING ON WEDNESDAY, THE 29 TH OCTOBER, 2014 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . . ) ( ! ) (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) (VIKAS AWAS THY) '#$ / VICE PRESIDENT % &' / JUDICIAL MEMBER (% /CHENNAI, )& /DATED: 29 TH OCTOBER, 2014 TNMM &* +,-, /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. ./0 /CIT(A) 4. . /CIT 5. ,12 3 /DR 6. 245 /GF