Smt. Aeshra Narharibhai Patel, Baroda V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(1), Baroda

ITA 243/AHD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8415 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-04-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 02-02-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Corroborative evidences
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 243/AHD/2016 / A.Y. 2009-10 SMT. AESHRA NARHARIBHAI PATEL, B-275, VAIKUNTH SOCIETY-1, WAGHODIA ROAD, BARODA -390019 PAN : AUJPP 0621 P VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1), BARODA ! / (APPELLANT) '# ! / (RESPONDENT) BY ASSESSEE(S) : SHRI DEEPAK SHAH, AR BY REVENUE : SHRI PRASOON KABRA, SR DR / DATE OF HEARING : 03/04/2018 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 23/04/2018 / O R D E R PER S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER :- THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 ARISES AGAINST CIT(A)-1, VADODARAS ORDER DATED 18.12.2015 PASSED IN CASE NO.CAB- 1/172/2015-16 UPHOLDING ASSESSING OFFICERS ACTION DISALLOWING HER EXPENDITURE CLAIM OF RS.18,47,757/- IN ASSESSMENT O RDER DATED 18.03.2014 IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF T HE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT. HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES REITERATING THEIR RESPECTIVE STANDS AGAINST AND IN SUPPORT OF THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES . CASE FILE PERUSED. 2. WE NOTICE AT THE OUTSET THAT THE CIT(A) IN HIS D ETAILED DISCUSSION ON THE ISSUE OF IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE REJECTS ASSESSEE S CONTENTION IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER:- 4.3. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE APPELLANT'S SUBMISSION AND THE AO'S OBSERVATIONS. THOUGH THE AO HAD POINTED OU T SEVERAL ITA NO. 243/AHD/2016 SMT. AESHRA NARHARIBHAI PATEL VS. ITO A.Y :- 2009-10 - 2 - DISCREPANCIES IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME FILED BY THE APPELLANT, ULTIMATELY HE HAS DISALLOWED ONLY THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT OF HAVING MADE PAYMENT OF RS.18,47,757/- AS PAYMENT TO ARTISTS. SUCH DISALLOWANCE HAS BEEN MADE BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THE APPELLANT CO ULD NOT PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCES OR DETAILS IN THIS REGARD. THE AO HAS POI NTED OUT THAT THE APPELLANT COULD NOT FURNISH ANY SUPPORTING EVIDENCE S FOR THE EXPENSES CLAIMED AND EVEN OFFERED TO PAY TAX ON THE PROFIT @ 8% TO THE TURNOVER, KEEPING IN VIEW THE ABOVE DISCREPANCY. THE AO HAS ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THERE IS NOTHING ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT THE APPELLA NT WAS ENGAGED IN THE SUPPLYING OF ARTISTS IN THE FASHION SHOWS. THE A O'S REASONING THAT IF THIS HAD BEEN THE CASE, THE APPELLANT WOULD HAVE RECEIVE D THE PAYMENTS AFTER DEDUCTION OF IDS WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN REFLECTED IN HER FORM 26AS IS ALSO ACCEPTABLE AND CORRECT REASONING. A PERUSAL OF TH E ENTIRE FACTS SHOWS THAT THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT THAT SHE WAS SUPPLYING A RTISTS FOR FASHION SHOWS IS NOTHING BUT A COOKED UP STORY TO CLAIM BOGUS EXP ENDITURE IN ORDER TO REDUCE HER TAXABLE INCOME. THE APPELLANT HAS RECE IVED THE PAYMENTS IN HER BANK ACCOUNT ON ACCOUNT OF HER MODELING ASSIGNMENTS ARID AS HAS BEEN DISCUSSED IN DETAIL BY THE AO, THE EXPENSES BEING B ORNE ARE ON ACCOUNT OF HER PERSONAL PURCHASES, CONVEYANCE AND OTHER PERSON AL NECESSITIES. EVEN THE RENT BEING PAID BY HER IS MUCH MORE THAT THE IN COME SHOWN BY HER. UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, THE DISALLOWANCE OF PAYME NTS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN MADE TO ARTISTS IS CORRECT AND IS UPHELD. IT MAY ALSO BE POINTED OUT THAT THE AO HAS STILL ALLOWED EXPENSES TO THE TUNE OF RS.8,32,806/- TO THE APPELLANT WHICH ARE REASONABLE EXPENSES FOR THE PUR POSE OF CARRYING OUT HER MODELING PROFESSION. THE EXPENSES DISALLOWED ARE TH E SPECIFIC EXPENDITURES CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT FOR WHICH NEITHER ANY DETA ILS NOR ANY SUPPORTING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES ARE AVAILABLE WITH HER. HENCE , THE DISALLOWANCE OF THIS AMOUNT IS UP HELD. 3. WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO TH E RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE MAIN AMO UNT IN QUESTION DEPOSITED IN HER BANK ACCOUNT TO THE TUNE OF RS.18, 70,500/- STANDS ASSESSED AS BUSINESS/PROFESSIONAL INCOME. THIS ASS ESSEE IS A MODEL ADMITTEDLY ATTENDING FASHION SHOWS AND FASHION WEEK S AS WELL AS ADVERTISEMENTS & ACTING. WE NOTICE IN THIS FACTUAL BACKDROP THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HIMSELF HAS ACCEPTED HER IDENTICA L EXPENDITURE OF RS.30,75,494/- AND RS.21,16,162/- AGAINST CORRESPON DING INCOMES OF RS.39,50,550/- AND RS.25,77,400/- IN ASSESSMENT YEA RS 2010-2011 & 2011- 12; RESPECTIVELY. SHE HAS ALSO PLACED ON RECORD DE TAILS OF EXPENSES, REVISED ITA NO. 243/AHD/2016 SMT. AESHRA NARHARIBHAI PATEL VS. ITO A.Y :- 2009-10 - 3 - FINANCIAL STATEMENT, TRIAL BALANCE, INCOME LEDGER, LEDGER EXPENDITURE, SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS & PAYMENTS, BANK STATEMENT, FOR M NO.26AS AND LEDGER ACCOUNT IN SUPPORT OF HER IMPUGNED CLAIM. W E FEEL IN THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES THAT THE LARGER INTEREST OF JUSTI CE WOULD BE MET IF THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE IS RESTRICTED TO 50% ONLY SIN CE THERE IS NO DIRECT EVIDENCE CONTROVERTING THE CIT(A)'S FINDINGS EXTRAC TED IN THE PROCEEDINGS PARAGRAPH. WE MAKE IT CLEAR THAT OUR INSTANT ADJU DICATION SHALL NOT FORM A PRECEDENT IN ANY PRECEDING OR SUCCEEDING ASSESSME NT YEAR. THE ASSESSEE THEREFORE SUCCEEDS IN GETTING RELIEF TO THE EXTENT OF 50% OF THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE. THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL IS PARTLY ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 23 RD APRIL, 2018 AT AHMEDABAD SD/- SD/- (N.K. BILLAIYA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 23/04/2018 *BT & '() *) / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ' $ / CONCERNED CIT 4. $ ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. ' **' , ' , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. / / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD