Vandana Reddy Alva, Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(1), Hyderabad

ITA 251/Hyd/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9610 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Next Hearing Date: 01-01-2020
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 05-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NILANJAN DEY
• Keywords: Salary income; Additional evidence
• Section: 251

Judgement Text

ITA NO 251 OF 2018 VANDANA REDDY ALVA HYDERABAD. PAGE 1 OF 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD B SMC BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.251/HYD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15 SMT. VANDANA REDDY ALVA HYDERABAD PAN:AGBPA3463A VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 15(1) HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SMT. S. SANDHYA REVENUE BY : SRI NILANJAN DEY, DR DATE OF HEARING: 01/01/2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 08/01/2020 ORDER THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THE A.Y 2014-15 AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A)-7, HYDERABAD, DATED 17.11. 2017. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE, A N INDIVIDUAL, ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF RETAILING OF PETROLEUM PRODUCTS, IN THE NAME AND STYLE OF M/S. JAYALEELA F ILLING STATION, AND ALSO DERIVING INCOME FROM SALARY, FILED HER RET URN OF INCOME ON 26.9.2014, ADMITTING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.8,72,529 /-. 3. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 143(3), TH E ASSESSEE WAS DIRECTED TO FILE CERTAIN INFORMATION. THE ASSESSEE FILED THE INFORMATION AND AFTER VERIFICATION OF THE SAME, THE AO FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEBITED CERTAIN EXPENDI TURE TO THE P&L A/C WITH REGARD TO THE DRESS MAINTENANCE, BUNK MAINTENANCE, REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE, GENERAL EXPENSE S, CONVEYANCE, GENERATOR MAINTENANCE, STAFF WELFARE, T ANKER BATTA ITA NO 251 OF 2018 VANDANA REDDY ALVA HYDERABAD. PAGE 2 OF 4 AND VEHICLE MAINTENANCE ETC., TOTALING TO RS.21,05, 401/-. SOME OF THE VOUCHERS AND BILLS WERE HAND-MADE AND SOME DID NOT CONTAIN NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE RECIPIENT. IN SOME BILLS, T HERE WAS NO SIGNATURE OF THE RECIPIENT ETC., THEREFORE, HE HELD THAT THEY ARE NOT SUSCEPTIBLE FOR VERIFICATION. THEREFORE, HE DISALLO WED 25% OF THE EXPENDITURE WHICH AMOUNTED TO RS.5,26,350/-. 4. FURTHER, THE AO ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN UNSECURED LOAN OF RS.10.00 LAKHS FROM SHRI T. R. PAPALAL WHO IS THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE. WHEN THE ASSESSE E DID NOT FILE THE CONFIRMATION LETTER, THE AO DOUBTED THE IDENTIT Y OF THE CREDITOR AND THE GENUINENESS OF THE LOANS. THEREFORE, HE HAS TREATED IT AS UNEXPLAINED THE CASH CREDIT AND BROUGHT IT TO TAX. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (A) WHO DISMISSED THE SAME AND THE ASSESSEE IS IN SECOND APPEAL BEFORE TH E TRIBUNAL BY RAISING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT (A) IS ERRONEOUS B OTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW. 2. THE LEARNED CIT (A) IS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE A DDITION OF RS.5,26,350 MADE BY THE AO BY DISALLOWING 25% OF TH E EXPENDITURE. 3. THE LEARNED CIT (A) IS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE A DDITION OF RS.10.00 LAKHS MADE BY THE AO DISBELIEVING THE CASH CREDIT RECEIVED FROM SHRI T.R. PAPALAL. 4. ANY OTHER GROUND THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME O F HEARING. 5. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES WHO RELIED UPON TH EIR CONTENTIONS MADE BEFORE THE RESPECTIVE AUTHORITIES BELOW, I FIND THAT THE EXPENDITURE HAS BEEN DISALLOWED BY THE AO BECAUSE SOME OF THE BILLS AND VOUCHERS DID NOT CONTAIN THE NAMES OR SIGNATURES OF THE RELEVANT PERSONS. HOWEVER, I AM OF THE OPINI ON THAT THE DISALLOWANCE OF 25% OF THE TOTAL EXPENDITURE IS VER Y HIGH. ITA NO 251 OF 2018 VANDANA REDDY ALVA HYDERABAD. PAGE 3 OF 4 THEREFORE, I DIRECT THE AO TO RESTRICT THE DISALLOW ANCE TO 10% OF THE TOTAL EXPENDITURE I.E. RS.21,05,401/-. 6. WITH REGARD TO THE CASH CREDIT RECEIVED FROM THE ASSESSEES FATHER AND THE ASSESSEES FAILURE TO FUR NISH CONFIRMATION LETTER FROM HER FATHER IN THE PROCEEDI NGS BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT SHE WAS NOT IN TALKING TERMS WITH HER FATHER AND THEREFORE, WAS NO T ABLE TO PRODUCE CONFIRMATION LETTERS. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED PAPER BOOK AND THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN WHICH SHE HAS FILED THE COPIES OF THE SUIT FILED BY THE ASSESSEES FATHER A GAINST THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIVIL COURT WHEREIN THE ASSESSE ES FATHER HAD CLEARLY SHOWN RS.10.00 LAKHS AS RECEIVABLE FROM THE ASSESSEE. THUS, THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ABLE TO PROVE PRIMA FAC IE AS IT IS A LOAN FROM HER FATHER. SINCE THE EVIDENCE IS FILED F OR THE FIRST TIME BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, I DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO RE MAND THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH A DIRECTION TO VERIFY AN D IF THE ASSESSEES FATHER HAS FILED THE CIVIL SUIT FOR THE AMOUNT OF R S.10.00 LAKHS, WHICH IS THE SUBJECT MATTER OF ADDITION BEFORE US, THEN THE SAME SHOULD BE ACCEPTED BY THE AO AND NO ADDITION IS TO BE MADE. 7. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 8 TH JANUARY, 2020. SD/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 8 TH JANUARY, 2020. VINODAN/SPS ITA NO 251 OF 2018 VANDANA REDDY ALVA HYDERABAD. PAGE 4 OF 4 COPY TO: 1 SMT. VANDANA REDDY ALVA, 18-488 MATHRUKRUPA, ROAD NO.3, MALLIKARJUNA NAGAR, MALKAJGIRI, HYDERABAD 500047 2 ITO WARD 15(1) IT TOWERS, AC GUARDS, HYDERABAD 3 CIT (A)-7 HYDERABAD 4 PR. CIT 7 HYDERABAD 5 THE DR, ITAT HYDERABAD 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER