Lal Chand Agarwal, Guwahati V. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Guwahati

ITA 221/GTY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8496 (ITAT-GUWAHATI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 24-08-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K BHARDWARJ
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI BENCH SMC GUWAHATI BEFORE SHRI S.S, GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.221/GAU/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2010-11 LAL CHAND AGARWAL SOHEL NIWAS, 3 RD FLOOR, CHATTRIBARI ROAD, GUWAHATI-781 001 [ PAN NO.ACBPA 7450 K ] / V/S . ACIT, CIRCLE-1, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, 6 TH FLOOR, ROOM NO. 613, G.S. ROAD, GUWAHATI- 781005 /APPELLANT .. /RESPONDENT /BY APPELLANT SHRI SOMNATH GHOSH, ADVOCATE /BY RESPONDENT SHRI A.K. BHARDWARJ, ADDL. CIT-DR /DATE OF HEARING 11-07-2019 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 10-10-2019 /O R D E R THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 , ARISES AGAINST THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-1, GUWAHATIS ORDER DATED 17.01.2018 PASSED IN CASE NO.GUWA-115/2013-2014 INVOLVING PRO CEEDINGS U/S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT. HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. CASE FILE PERUSED. 2. THE ASSESSEES FIRST SUBSTANTIVE GROUND RAISED I N THE INSTANT APPEAL CHALLENGES CORRECTNESS OF BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ACTION D ISALLOWING PURCHASES OF RS.22,00,000/- IN COAL TRADING AND TRANSPORT CONTRA CT WORK BUSINESS. IT IS NOTICED FROM PAGE 2 OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28.03 .2013 THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED THE IMPUGNED SUM ON ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEE S FAILURE IN FILING THE ITA NO.221/GAU/2018 A.Y. 2010-11 LAL CHAND AGARWAL VS. ACIT, CIR-1 GHY PAGE 2 CORRESPONDING PURCHASE BILLS TO THE TUNE OF 97.77% OF HIS PURCHASES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT PR ODUCED ON RECORD THE PROPER BILLS AND VOUCHERS OF PURCHASES AS WELL AS SUPPORTING DOC UMENTS OF ROYALTY PAYMENTS, THOSE PURCHASES INDICATED INFLATION AND THEREFORE, HE DIS ALLOWED RS.22,00,000/- OUT OF RS.28,62,11,269/-. THE CIT(A) HAS AFFIRMED THE SAME IN HIS EX PARTE ORDER UNDER CHALLENGE. 3. I HAVE GIVEN MY THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO RIVA L CONTENTIONS. BOTH THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES REITERATE THEIR RESPECTIVE STANDS A GAINST AND IN SUPPORT OF THE IMPUGNED PURCHASES DISALLOWANCE. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO PLACE D ON RECORD A DETAILED PAPER BOOK RUNNING TO 131 PAGES. THE FACT HOWEVER REMAINS THAT NEITHER THIS TAXPAYER HAS BEEN ABLE TO PROVE ALL OF HIS PURCHASES BY FILING THE RE LEVANT SUPPORTIVE EVIDENCE NOR THE LEARNED LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE DRAWN ANY COMPARISON OF THOSE COAL PURCHASES EXPENDITURE IN PRECEDING AND SUCCEEDING ASSESSMENT YEARS. I THEREFORE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE THAT A LUMPSUM DISALLOWANCE OF RS.3,00, 000/- OUT OF THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE OF RS.22,00,000/- WOULD MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE WITH A RIDER THAT THE SAME SHALL NOT BE TREATED AS A PRECEDENT IN ANY OTH ER ASSESSMENT YEARS. THIS FIRST SUBSTANTIVE GROUND IS PARTLY ACCEPTED IN ABOVE TERM S. 4. LD. COUNSEL SUBMITS THAT THIS ASSESSEE DOES NOT WISH TO PRESS FOR HIS SECOND SUBSTANTIVE GROUND SEEKING TO DELETE VAT PENALTY DI SALLOWANCE OF RS.48,000/- KEEPING IN VIEW THE SMALLNESS OF THE AMOUNT INVOLVE D. 5. LASTLY COMES AD HOC DISALLOWANCE OF VARIOUS MISCELLANEOUS AND SALARY EXPENSES AMOUNTING TO RS.5,26,759/-. SUFFICE TO SAY , I NOTICE HEREIN AS WELL THAT NEITHER THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE DRAWN ANY COMPAR ATIVE CHART RELATING TO SIMILAR HEAD IN PRECEDING AND SUCCEEDING ASSESSMENT YEARS N OR THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ABLE TO PROVE THE SAME BY WAY OF SUFFICIENT SUPPORTIVE EVID ENCE. I THEREFORE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO RESTRICT THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE T O A LUMPSUM AMOUNT OF RS.50,000/- WITH A RIDER THAT THE SAME SHALL NOT BE TREATED AS PRECEDENT IN ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR. NECESSARY COMPUTATION TO FOLLOW AS PER LAW. ITA NO.221/GAU/2018 A.Y. 2010-11 LAL CHAND AGARWAL VS. ACIT, CIR-1 GHY PAGE 3 6. THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED IN ABOV E TERMS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 34(3) OF T HE ITAT RULES BY PUTTING ON NOTICE BOARD ON 10/10/2019 SD/- (S.S. GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBE R GAUHATI, *DKP/SR.PS ' - 10/10/2019 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. /APPELLANT-LAL CHAND AGARWAL, SOHEL NIWAS, 3 RD FLOOR, CHATTRIBARI ROAD GUWAHATI-7 81001 2. /RESPONDENT-ACIT, CIR-1, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, 6 TH FLOOR, $ N;.613, G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI-781005 3. & ' , / CONCERNED CIT GUWAHATI 4. ' - / CIT (A) 5. - //& , & , / DR, ITAT, GUWAHATI 6. 1 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , /TRUE COPY/ SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY (ON TOUR) &,