Shri Rameshwar Choudhary, Shajapur V. The ITO, Shajapur

ITA 214/IND/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 21422714 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-10-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 17-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: S S DESHPANDE
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

1 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 214/IND/2013 A.Y. 2008-09 RAMESHWAR CHOUDHARY SHAJAPUR PAN ABOPC9127H :: APPELLANT VS INCOME TAX OFFICER SHAJAPUR :: RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY SHRI S.S. DESHPANDE REVENUE BY SHRI R.A. VERMA DATE OF HEARING 9.10.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 9.10.2013 O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH , JUDICIAL MEMBER THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER D ATED 4.1.2013 OF THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, UJJAIN. THE FIRST GROUND RAISED IN THE APPEAL PERTAINS TO UPHOLDING T HE ADDITION OF RS. 24,90,815/-, BEING THE DIFFERENCE IN CASH BALAN CE AS SHOWN IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND SHOWN IN E-FILE RETURN . 2. THE CRUX OF ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE TOTAL ASSET SIDE WAS TALLYING AND WHILE SHOWING THE CASH BALANCE 2 AND OTHER ASSETS, THE MISTAKE OCCURRED DUE TO MANUA L FEEDING OF THE DATA, THUS NO ADDITION WAS WARRANTED. ON THE OT HER HAND, THE LEARNED SENIOR DR DEFENDED THE ADDITION. 2.1 WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PE RUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE FACTS, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOWED CASH IN HAND AT RS.25,42,782/- IN E -FILE RETURN WHEREAS AS PER THE BALANCE SHEET FILED DURING THE C OURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THERE WAS CASH BALANCE OF R S.51,967/- ONLY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADDED THE DIFFERENCE OF RS.24,90,815/-. THE ASSESSEE ALSO SHOWED FIXED ASSE TS AT RS.40,23,135/- IN THE E-FILE RETURN WHEREAS IN THE BALANCE SHEET THE ASSETS WERE SHOWN AT RS.65,13,590/-. THE CRUX OF ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THIS DIFFERENCE O CCURRED DUE TO E- FILE RETURN AND HE IS IN A POSITION TO SUBSTANTIATE THE FACTS. KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACTS NARRATED BEFORE US, WE AR E OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ULTIMATE INTENTION OF T HE LEGISLATURE IS TO COLLECT LEGITIMATE TAXES. IN THE INTEREST OF JU STICE AND FAIR PLAY, WE REMAND THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED ASS ESSING OFFICER WITH THE DIRECTION TO EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSE SSEE AFRESH AFTER PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO T HE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO AT LIBERTY TO FURNISH EVIDENCE , IF ANY, IN 3 SUPPORT OF THE CLAIM. THIS GROUND IS ALLOWED FOR S TATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. 3. THE NEXT GROUND PERTAINS TO MAINTAINING THE DISA LLOWANCE OF RS.3,40,276/- OUT OF INTEREST PAYMENT. THE CRUX OF ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE MAJORITY OF A DVANCES WERE GIVEN TO FARMERS FROM WHOM GOODS WERE PURCHASED AND NOT TO THE SISTER CONCERN. THIS ASSERTION WAS STRONGLY OPPOSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR DR. THE LEARNED COUNSEL CONTENDED T HAT HE IS READY TO FILE CONFIRMATION FROM THESE FARMERS. IN V IEW OF THESE FACTS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT NO PREJUDICE IS CAUS ED TO EITHER SIDE, THEREFORE, THIS GROUND IS ALSO REMANDED TO TH E FILE OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF T HE ASSESSEE. IF ANY CONFIRMATION IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE LEAR NED ASSESSING OFFICER IS FREE TO EXAMINE SUCH PERSONS/FARMERS AND THEN DECIDE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THIS GROUND IS ALSO ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4. THE NEXT GROUND PERTAINS TO ADDITION OF RS.59,24 0/- FOR SHORTAGE OF STOCK AND RS.8,000/- OUT OF TRAVELLING EXPENSES. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT THE ADDITION WAS WRONGLY MADE WHEREAS THE LEARNED SENIOR DR DEFENDED THE ADDITION. THE FACTS, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E SHOWED SHORT 4 STOCK OF SOYABEAN TO THE TUNE OF 36.45 QUINTALS. T HE ASSESSING OFFICER ADDED RS.59,240/- TO THE TAXABLE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE DEBITED PURCHASE OF 2061.25 QUINTALS O F SOYABEAN WHEREAS THE KUMS SHOWED PURCHASES TO THE TUNE OF 20 97.70 QUINTALS WHICH RESULTED INTO DIFFERENCE OF 36.45 QU INTALS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THE BOOKS U/S 145(3) OF THE ACT AND CALCULATED THE PURCHASE PRICE OF SOYABEAN AND ADDED RS.59,250/-. WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE CONCLUSION ARRIVED AT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH WAS SUSTAINED BY THE CI T(A). THIS GROUND IS, THEREFORE, HAVING NO MERIT. 4.1 SO FAR AS THE ADDITION OF RS. 8,000/- OUT OF TR AVELLING EXPENSES IS CONCERNED, THE ADDITION WAS MADE AS THE ASSESSEE DID NOT MAINTAIN PROPER VOUCHERS. NO SUBMISSION WAS MADE BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) CONTROVERTING THE FINDING OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. SO ON THIS GROUND ALSO, THE STAN D OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS AFFIRMED. 5. THE NEXT GROUND PERTAINS TO ENHANCEMENT OF RS.3 ,95,000/- OUT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME. THE CRUX OF ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS HAVING 47.33 B IGHAS (24 ACRES) OF AGRICULTURAL LAND. THE IMPUGNED ADDITION WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE PLEA THAT THE NECESSAR Y DETAILS 5 WHETHER THE LAND WAS IRRIGATED OR NOT, WHICH CROPS WERE GROWN, DETAILS OF EXPENSES, ETC. WERE NOT FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE SHOWED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME AT RS.5.95 LACS WHICH AS PER THE ASSESSING OFFICER CANNOT BE EARNED OUT OF 4 7.33 BIGHAS OF LAND. THE INCOME TO THE EXTENT OF RS.2 LACS WAS AC CEPTED AND THE REMAINING INCOME OF RS.3.95 LACS WAS TREATED AS INC OME FROM OTHER SOURCES. KEEPING IN VIEW THE TOTALITY OF FAC TS AND IN THE ABSENCE OF NECESSARY DETAILS, THE ADDITION IS RESTR ICTED TO RS.2 LACS IN PLACE OF RS.3,95,000/- BY THE LEARNED CIT(A ). THUS, THE ADDITION REMAINS TO THE EXTENT OF RS.1,95,000/-. TH IS GROUND IS PARTLY ALLOWED. FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 9.10.2013. (R.C.SHARMA) (JOGINDER SINGH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 28.10.2013 COPY TO: APPELLANT, RESPONDENT, CIT, CIT(A), DR, GU ARD FILE VYAS 6