Shri Durjansingh Mansingh Rathod, SILVASSA V. The ACIT., Vapi Circle, Vapi

ITA 214/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 21420514 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-09-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 05-08-2011
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 27-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MEENA
• Keywords: Depreciation
• Section: 143(3); 80G

Judgement Text

- 1 - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH A AHMEDABAD BEFORE S/SHRI D.K. TYAGI, JM AND R. C. SHARMA, A.M . SHRI DURJANSINGH MANSINGH RATHOD, PROP. KOYAL CONSTRUCTION, KOYAL HOUSE, P.O. KHADOLI, SILVASSA. PAN: ABVPR4748Q ACIT, VAPI CIRCLE, VAPI. APPELLANT VS. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY :- SHRI RAJESH M. UPADHYAY, A.R. RESPONDENT BY:- SHRI S. K. MEENA, SR.DR O R D E R DATE OF HEARING 05.08.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT -16/9/2011. PER D.K. TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER . THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF CIT(A) DATED 18 TH OCTOBER, 2010, FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2007-08, IN THE MATER OF ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. ITA NO.214/AHD/2011 ASST. YEAR 2007-08 ITA NO.214/AHD/2011 ASST. YEAR 2007-08 2 2. FIRST GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO THE A DDITION OF RS. 30,207/- BY DISALLOWING EXPENDITURE INCURRED ON BUS INESS PROMOTION, CAR DEPRECIATION, TELEPHONE/MOBILE EXPENSES AND TRA VELING EXPENSES. 3. RIVAL CONTENTIONS HAVE BEEN HEARD AND RECORDS PERUSED. THE ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRANSPO RTATION AND CONSTRUCTION WORK. WHILE FRAMING ASSESSMENT U/S 143 (3), THE AO ON AD-HOC AND PRESUMPTIVE BASIS DISALLOWED 20 % OF EXP ENSES, WHICH WERE IN THE NATURE OF BUSINESS PROMOTION, TELEPHONE , MOBILE EXPENSES, TRAVELING EXPENSES ETC. BY STATING THAT E XPENDITURE WERE PERSONAL IN NATURE. LOOKING TO THE NATURE OF ASSESS EE'S BUSINESS, ITS TURNOVER AND THE QUANTUM OF EXPENDITURE HAVING BEEN INCURRED UNDER VARIOUS HEADS, WE DEEM IT REASONABLE TO RESTRICT TH E DISALLOWANCE TO THE EXTENT OF 10 %. WE DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 4. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO AGGRIEVED FOR DISALLOWANCE OF RS.1,22,250/- PAID TO THE TRANSPORTERS TOWARDS HIRE CHARGES BUT THE ACCOUNTANT THROUGH MISTAKE DEBITED AS CASH WITHDRAW AL FOR HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES. ON THE BASIS OF ENTRY IN THE BOOKS OF ACC OUNT, THE AO DISALLOWED THE SAME. CONTENTION OF ID. AUTHORIZED R EPRESENTATIVE WAS THAT DUE TO MISTAKE WRONG ENTRY WAS PASSED WITH RES PECT TO EXPENDITURE INCURRED TOWARDS TRANSPORTATION, WHICH WAS WRONGLY SHOWN IN THE BOOKS ITA NO.214/AHD/2011 ASST. YEAR 2007-08 3 AS CASH WITHDRAWALS FOR HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES. AS PER LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, THE ASSESSEE HAD ALREADY SHOWN SEPA RATE EXPENDITURE ON ACCOUNT OF HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES AND MERELY INADVERTE NT MISTAKE CANNOT BE MADE THE BASIS FOR THE SAID M. AFTER HEARING THE RI VAL CONTENTIONS, WE RESTORE THIS GROUND BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO F IND OUT IF THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN SEPARATE WITHDRAWALS ON ACCOUNT OF HOUSE HOLD AND THE EXPENDITURE ACTUALLY INCURRED ON PAYMENT TO TRANSPO RTERS FOR HIRE CHARGES. IF THE AO FINDS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SEPARATELY SH OWN HOUSE HOLD WITHDRAWALS, THEN THE ISSUE WITH REGARD TO INCURRIN G OF EXPENDITURE ON HIRE CHARGES MAY BE LOOKED ON MERITS BY DECIDING TH E ISSUE AFRESH. WE DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 5. THE LAST GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO DI SALLOWANCE OF ADDITION U/S 80G IN RESPECT OF DONATION OF RS.51,00 0/- 6. FROM THE RECORD, WE FOUND THAT MERELY BY OBSERVI NG THAT !HE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DEBITED THE DONATION IN PROFIT AND LOSS A/C. THE AO HAS DECLINED ASSESSEE'S CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80G. THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATI VE WAS THAT DONATION WAS NOT CLAIMED IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT BUT THE SAME WAS CLAIMED IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME. AS P ER OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, IF THE ASSESSEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80G IN RESPECT OF DONATION MERELY BECAUSE THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN DEBIT ED IN PROFIT AND LOSS ITA NO.214/AHD/2011 ASST. YEAR 2007-08 4 ACCOUNT DEDUCTION CLAIMED UNDER CHAPTER VIA CANNOT BE DECLINED. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE RESTORE THIS MATTER BACK AL SO TO THE FILE OF AO FOR VERIFYING THE ELIGIBILITY OF ASSESSEE'S CLAIM FOR D ONATION U/S 80G AND TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF OUR ABOVE OBSERVATIONS. WE DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED IN PART IN TERMS INDICATED HEREINABOVE. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 16/9/2011. SD/- SD/- (R. C. SHARMA) (D.K. TYAGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD, DATED : 16/9/2011. MAHATA/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE REVENUE. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)- 4. THE CIT CONCERNS. 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT, AHMEDABAD ITA NO.214/AHD/2011 ASST. YEAR 2007-08 5 1.DATE OF DICTATION 23/8/11. 2.DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER /8/11. /OTHER MEMBER. 3.DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P.S./P.S. 4.DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT.. 5.DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR .P.S./P.S 6.DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK .. 7.DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 8.THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSTT. REG ISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER 9.DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER..