Smt. Sangita Jhunjhunwala, Kolkata V. I.T.O.,Ward-29(4), Kolkata

ITA 2473/KOL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1467 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-02-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 11-02-2021
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 19-11-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAYANTA KHANRA
• Assessee Lawyers: GOUR SARAN KEDIA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Earning of tax free income; Set aside
• Section: 80C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH B - SMC KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S ANJAY GARG , JUDICIAL MEMBER . / ITA NO. 2473 /KOL/20 19 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 1 3 - 14 SMT. SANGITA JHUNJHUNWALA 5E NEW R OAD,ALIPUR,KOLKATA - 27. [ PAN NO. ACKPJ1818R / V/S . I.T.O., WARD 29(4), KOLKATA,AAYKARBHAVAN DAKSHIN, 2 NO. GARIAHAT ROAD, KOLKATA - 700 031. / APPELLANT .. / RESPONDENT HEARING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING / BY APPELLANT MR. GOUR SARAN KEDIA, AR / BY RESPONDENT MR. JAYANTA KHANRA, JCIT, SR.DR / DATE OF HEARING 1 1 - 02 - 2021 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 1 1 - 02 - 2021 / O R D E R TH E PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 05 - 09 - 2019 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) - 1 2 , KOLKATA [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT(A)] . 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THIS CASE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: - 1.THAT LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED BY PARTLY CONFIRMING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. ASSESSING AUTHORITY. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED BY ONLY ALLOWING THE PARTIAL AMOUNT OF RENT AND CONSIDERING THE NET AMOUNT OF PAYMENT AFTER ADJUSTMENT OF ADVANCE WHEREAS THE LD. APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS FAILED TO CONSIDER THE ACTUAL PAYABLE AMOUNT. 3. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED BY CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 53,676/ - . IN THIS REGARD YOUR PETITI ONER SUBMITS THAT SHE HAD NOT CLAIMED ANY ITA NO. 2473/KOL/19 A.Y 20 1 3 - 14 SMT. SANGITA JHUNJHUNWALA PAGE 2 EXPENDITURE AGAINST THE EXEMPT INCOME. MOREOVER, YOUR PETI TI ONER HAS ONLY DIVIDEND OF RS. 802/ - AS EXEMPT INCOME ONLY. 4. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED BY CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,10,023/ - BY DISALLOWING THE CLAIM OF YOUR PETITIONER U/S. 80C & 80D OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 DESPITE PRODUCTION OF ALL THE SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS. 5. THAT THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) PARTIALLY CONFIRMING ORDER OF THE LD. AO IS WHIMSICAL, CAPRICIOUS AND MOST PREJUDICIAL ONE. 6. THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED BY NOT ALLOWING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BEFORE CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT PASSED BY LD. AO WHICH IS MOST ARBITRARY AND THUS VIOLATES THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 7. THAT THE ORDER OF LD.AO & BY LD. CIT(A) BOTH ARE BAD ON POINTS OF LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS AS SUCH VOID UNDER THE LAW. 8. THAT YOUR PETITIONER CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, AMEND, MODIFY ,SUBSTITUTE, WITHDRAW ANY OF THE GROUND OR GROUNDS OF THIS APPEAL PETITION ON OR BEFORE OR AT THE TIME O F HEARING. 2. A PERUSAL OF ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL REVEALS THAT IN THIS APPEAL THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTESTED THE TWO ISSUES. FIRST ISSUE IS THE DISALLOWANCE OUT OF EXPENDITURE CLAIMED ON RENT PAID. THE SECOND ISSUE IS REGARDING THE DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION CLAIMED UNDER SECTION 80C & 80D OF THE INCOME T AX ACT, 1963 ( IN SHORT, THE ACT ). 3. AS FAR AS THE FIRST ISSUE IS RELATING TO DISALLOWANCE IN RESPECT OF EXPENDITURE CLAIMED ON ACCOUNT OF RENT PAYMENT IS CONCERNED, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE THOUGH HAS CLAIMED RENT EXPENDITURE FOR 12 MONTHS , BUT, H OWEVER, S HE PRODUCED BILLS/RECEIPTS ONLY FOR 8 MONTHS. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PRODUCED ALSO TH E RECEIPTS OF RENT PAYMENT FOR OTHER 4 MONTHS , B UT THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE FAILED TO CONSIDER THE SAME. SIMILARLY, IN RELATION TO CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80C/80D, LD. COUNSEL HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PAID MEDICAL INSURANCE PREMIUM. THAT RECE IPT WAS PRODUCED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES, WHICH HAS BEEN OVERLOOKED BY T HE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 4. SINCE THE ASSESSEES CLAIM IS BASED ON EVIDENCES/RECEIPTS, THE SAME CAN BE WELL VERIFIED BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER ( IN SHORT, THE LD. AO). IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD. AO WITH THE DIRECTION THAT HE WILL CONSIDER THE EVIDENCES/RECEIPTS ETC. IF ANY, FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE REAFTER DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH AS PER LAW. NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT LD.AO WILL PROVIDE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT H ER CASE . ITA NO. 2473/KOL/19 A.Y 20 1 3 - 14 SMT. SANGITA JHUNJHUNWALA PAGE 3 THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT AT THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THURS DAY, 1 1 TH FEBRUARY , 2021 . SD/ - /DATE - 1 1 /02/2021 (SANJAY GARG) / K OLKATA JUDICIAL MEMBER * *PP /SR.PS / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. /APPELLANT - SMT. SANGITA JHUNJHUNWALA, 5E NEW ROAD,ALIPUR,KOLKATA - 27. . 2. /RESPONDENT - I.T.O., WARD 29(4), KOLKATA,AAYKARBHAVAN DAKSHIN, 2 NO. GARIAHAT ROAD, KOLKATA - 700 031 3. / CONCERNED CIT I.T.O., WARD 29(4), KOLKATA,AAYKARBHAVAN DAKS HIN, 2 NO. GARIAHAT ROAD, KOLKATA - 700 031 4. - / CIT (A) 5. , / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6. / GUARD FILE. /TRUE COPY / BY ORDER/ , / ,