Jothlakshmi.V , CHENNAI V. ITO Non Corporate Ward 11(4), CHENNAI

ITA 2511/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5213 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-05-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 01-03-2018
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 17-10-2017
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N MADHAVAN
• Assessee Lawyers: K RAVI
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI , , $ BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /. I.T.A. NO. 2511/CHNY/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 SMT. JOTHILAKSHMI. V., NEW NO. 76, LINGHI CHETTY ST., CHENNAI 600 001. [PAN: ADPPJ 6288D] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON- CORPORATE WARD -11(4), CHENNAI 600 034. ( / APPELLANT) ( / RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI. K. RAVI, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : SHRI. N. MADHAVAN, ADDL. CIT - /DATE OF HEARING : 01.05.2018 - /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.05.2018 / O R D E R PER S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE ASSESSEE FILED THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- 13, CHENNAI IN ITA NO. 35/ CIT(A)-13/2013-14 DATED 18.07.2017 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. :-2-: ITA NO. 2995/CHNY/2017 & CO NO: 39/CHNY/2018 2. SMT. JOTHILAKSHMI, THE ASSESSEE, AN INDIVIDUAL I S IN THE TRANSPORT BUSINESS. WHILE MAKING THE ASSESSMENT FOR ASSESSME NT YEAR 2013-14, THE AO NOTED THAT IN THE CASES OF ASSOCIATE ROAD CARRIERS AND M/S. VENKATESWARA TRANSPORTS, THE SUNDRY CREDITORS BALANCE IN THE ASS ESSEES BOOKS WERE OF RS. 1,24,21,147/- AND RS. 10,07,528/- RESPECTIVELY. HO WEVER, THEY CAN CONFIRMED CREDIT TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 50,87,604/- AND RS. 5,8 6,370/-, RESPECTIVELY. THEREFORE, THE DIFFERENCE AMOUNTING TO RS. 73,33,54 3/- & RS. 4,21,158/- TOTALLING TO RS. 77,54,701/- WAS ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME U/S. 41(1) TREATING THEM AS CESSATION OF LIABILITY. AGGRIEVED, THE ASS ESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL. AGGR IEVED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE FILED THIS APPEAL. 3. THE AR INVITING OUR ATTENTION TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WHICH IS DATED 31.03.2016 SUBMITTED BY SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 28. 03.2016, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED AS TO WHY THE DIFFERENCE OF AMOUNT SHOULD NOT BE ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME. THE ASSESSEE BY HER LETTER DATED 30. 06.2016 EXPLAINED, INTER ALIA, THAT LOGISTIC BUSINESS IS PURELY LABOUR ORIEN TED. IT IS GENERAL PRACTICE IN TRANSPORT INDUSTRIES THAT WHATEVER BILLED BY BUYERS WERE ALWAYS DISPUTED BY OUR CLIENTS. THIS HAPPENS BECAUSE, GENERALLY THE C LIENTS NEVER AGREE FOR NUMBER OF LABOUR AND RATE OF PER LABOUR. AT A TIME WHEN THEY PAY THE BILL, INVARIABLY THEY DEDUCT CERTAIN NUMBER OF LABOURS AN D RATE OF PER LABOUR. SINCE YEAR LONG NO PROPER RECONCILIATION WERE CARRIED OUT GENERALLY OUR BALANCE WITH :-3-: ITA NO. 2995/CHNY/2017 & CO NO: 39/CHNY/2018 CLIENT BALANCE DIFFER. IN GENERAL, TRANSPORTERS AR E NOT EDUCATED PROPERLY AND THEY NEVER AGREE FOR THE CORRECTED FIGURES AND UNFO RTUNATELY DIFFERENCE CONTINUES IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. FURTHER, WE CO NFIRM THAT WHATEVER BALANCE GIVEN AS PER OUR BOOKS ARE CORRECT ETC. HO WEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT AGREE AND MADE AN ADDITION. UNFORT UNATELY, THE CIT(A) ALSO WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE FACTS AND ASSOCIATED CIRCUMSTANCES DISMISSED THE APPEAL. INVITING OUR ATTENTION TO THE PAPER BO OK, WHEREIN, THE COPIES OF E-MAILS/TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND COPIES OF STATEMENTS OF OUTSTANDING ISSUED BY THE ASSOCIATE ROAD CARRIERS ETC. ARE PLACED, THE AR PLEADED THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND SUSTAINE D BY THE CIT(A) DOES NOT WARRANT. IN FACT, THE AR PLEADED THAT IN THE INTE RESTS OF JUSTICE, THE ISSUE MAY BE REMITTED TO THE AO. BEFORE HIM THE ASSESSEE CAN EXPLAIN EACH AND EVERY TRANSACTION. 4. PER CONTRA, THE DR SUBMITTED THAT THOUGH, THE AS SESSEE HAS SHOWN HER INABILITY BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER SUBMITTING T HAT DURING THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER, 2010 THERE WAS A FIRE ACCIDENT IN THE GOD OWN, ALL THE STOCKS STORED ARE BELONGED TO BILT WAS DESTROYED IN FIRE, AFTER T HE FIRE ACCIDENT, BILT HAS COMPLETELY STOPPED DOING THE BUSINESS WITH THE ASSE SSEE AND THEREFORE THEY HAVE RECEIVED VERY LITTLE AMOUNT FROM THE OUTSTANDI NG ETC. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT CONFIRM, AND IT TOOK A DIFFERENT PLEA BEFORE THE CIT(A). :-4-: ITA NO. 2995/CHNY/2017 & CO NO: 39/CHNY/2018 HOWEVER, COULD NOT PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE CRE DITORS ETC BEFORE THE CIT(A) TOO AND HENCE, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) MAY B E CONFIRMED. 5. WE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GONE THROUGH THE RELEVANT MATERIAL. SINCE, THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE CANV ASSED HAS NOT BEEN PROPERLY VERIFIED, IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THESE ISSUES REQUIRE RE-EXAMINATION AND HENCE, WE REMIT T HE ISSUES BACK TO THE AO FOR A FRESH VERIFICATION. THE ASSESSEE SHALL PLACE ALL THE MATERIALS IN ITS SUPPORT BEFORE THE AO AND COMPLY TO THE AOS REQUIR EMENTS AS PER LAW. THE A O IS FREE TO CONDUCT APPROPRIATE ENQUIRY AS DEEMED FIT, BUT HE SHALL FURNISH ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE ON THE MATERIA L ETC TO BE USED AGAINST IT AND DECIDE THE MATTER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW . 6. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS TREATED AS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 01 ST MAY, 2018 AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) '# /JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- ( ) (S. JAYARAMAN) # /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :-5-: ITA NO. 2995/CHNY/2017 & CO NO: 39/CHNY/2018 /CHENNAI, 2 /DATED: 01 ST MAY, 2018 JPV -45676 /COPY TO: 1. 8 / APPELLANT 2. 4:8 /RESPONDENT 3. ; ) ( /CIT(A) 4. ; /CIT 5. 64 /DR 6. /GF