The ITO, Ward 1(3), Ahmedabad V. M/s. Arun Logistics Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 2531/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0778 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 28-10-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: B R POPAT
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 40A(3)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.2531/AHD/2013 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) THE ITO WARD-1(3) AHMEDABAD / VS. M/S.ARUN LOGISTICS PVT.LTD. 701, P.B. PAREKH TOWER OPP. VANIJYA BHAVAN KANKARIA AHMEDABAD ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAECA 6746 L ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI PRASOON KABRA, SR.DR / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI B.R. POPAT, AR / DATE OF HEARING 10/08/2016 !'# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 16/08/2016 / O R D E R PER SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-VI, AHMEDABAD D ATED 29/08/2013, AHMEDABAD FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2006-07. 2. THE RELEVANT FACTS AS CULLED OUT FROM THE MATERI ALS ON RECORD ARE AS UNDER:- ITA NO.2531/AHD /2013 ITO VS. M/S.ARUN LOGISTICS PVT.LTD. ASST.YEAR 2006-07 - 2 - 2.1. ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY STATED TO BE ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRANSPORT AND FLEET OWNER. ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETU RN OF INCOME FOR AY 2006-07 ON 31/12/2006 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF R S.3,22,699/-. ASSESSMENT WAS FINALIZED U/S.143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'THE ACT') ON 18/11/200 8 AND THE TOTAL INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS ACCEPTED. THEREAFTER, CI T VIDE ORDER DATED 22/03/2011 SET ASIDE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 18 /11/2008 U/S.263 OF THE ACT AND DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) TO PASS FRESH ORDERS AS PER THE DIRECTIONS CONTAINED THEREIN. PURSUANT TO THE DIRECTIONS OF THE CIT, AO VIDE ORDER DATED 20/12/2011 PASSED ORDER U/ S.143(3) R.W.S. 263 OF THE ACT AND DETERMINED THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.1, 89,80,522/-. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE AO, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A), WHO VIDE ORDER DATED 29/08/2013 (IN APPE AL NO.CIT(A)- VI/ITO, WD.13/228/11-12) GRANTED SUBSTANTIAL RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A), REVENUE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US AND HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS BY ADMITT ING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE DESPITE THE FACT THAT NONE OF THE EXCEPTIO NS IN RULE 46A WERE APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT(A) HAS OVERLOOKED THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSE E HAS NOT DISCHARGED ITS ONUS TO PROVIDE ACCURATE DETAILS OF PAYMENTS MA DE TOWARDS VARIOUS EXPENSES ON WHICH TDS U/S.194C/194I WAS TO BE DEDUC TED. THESE DETAILS WERE NEITHER FILED DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEE DINGS NOR REMAND PROCEEDINGS AND HENCE THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN UPHELD THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.1.96 CRORES U/S.40(A)(IA). ITA NO.2531/AHD /2013 ITO VS. M/S.ARUN LOGISTICS PVT.LTD. ASST.YEAR 2006-07 - 3 - ON THE FACT AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AN D IN LAW, THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFF ICER TO THE EXTENT MENTIONED ABOVE SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO DI SCLOSE HIS TRUE INCOME/BOOK PROFIT. 2.2. IN THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE, THE GRIE VANCE OF THE REVENUE IS THAT LD.CIT(A) OVERLOOKED THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DISCHARGED ITS ONUS TO PROVIDE ACCURATE DETAILS OF PAYMENTS MADE TOWARDS VARIOUS EXPENSES ON WHICH TDS U/S.194C AND 194I WAS TO BE DEDUCTED AND THAT LD.CIT(A) HAD ADMITTED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND THEREBY VIOLATED THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 46A OF THE IT RULES,1962. 3. BEFORE US, LD.SR.DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE A O. LD.AR, ON THE OTHER HAND, REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AO AND LD.CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS NO VIOLATION OF PROVIS IONS OF RULE 46A AS LD.CIT(A) HAS CALLED FOR THE REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO AND THEREAFTER LD.CIT(A) HAD DECIDED THE ISSUE. IN SUPPORT OF HIS SUBMISSION OF CALLING OF REMAND REPORT, HE POINTED TO PARA-3.9 OF LD.CIT( A)S ON PAGE NO.40. HE THEREFORE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A). 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE ISSUE IN THE PRESENT CASE IS WITH RESPECT TO DI SALLOWING OF EXPENDITURE U/S.40(A)(IA) AND VIOLATION OF RULE 46A BY THE LD.C IT(A). WE FIND THAT LD.CIT(A) WHILE GRANTING THE RELIEF HAS NOTED THAT ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED ITA NO.2531/AHD /2013 ITO VS. M/S.ARUN LOGISTICS PVT.LTD. ASST.YEAR 2006-07 - 4 - BY SUFFICIENT REASONS IN NOT COMPLYING WITH THE NOT ICES ISSUED DURING THE PROCEEDINGS U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 263 AND THEREFORE THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WERE ADMITTED BY HIM. HE HAS FURTHER NOTED THAT IN THE REMAND REPORT THAT WAS SOUGHT THE LD.CIT(A) HAD DIRECTED THE AO T O EXAMINE AS WHETHER THERE WAS VIOLATION OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40(A)( IA) OR SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT. HE NOTED THAT IN THE REMAND REPORT, AO HAD STATED THAT THE ENTIRE EXPENSES WERE NOT GENUINE AND THEREBY HAD GO NE BEYOND THE MANDATE OF DIRECTIONS GIVEN U/S.263 OF THE ACT. AS FAR AS THE MERITS OF DISALLOWANCE U/S.40(A)(IA)/40A(3) ARE CONCERNED, HE HAS GIVEN A FINDING THAT THERE WAS NO VIOLATION OF PAYMENT MADE U/S. 40 (A)(IA) OR 40A(3) OF THE ACT. BEFORE US, REVENUE HAS NOT POINTED OUT AN Y FALLACY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A). WE THEREFORE FIND NO REASON TO I NTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) AND THUS THIS GROUND OF REVENUE IS DIS MISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 16 /0 8 /2016 SD/- SD/- ( MAHAVIR PRASAD) ( ANIL CHATURVEDI ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 16/ 08 /2016 &.., .(../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS ITA NO.2531/AHD /2013 ITO VS. M/S.ARUN LOGISTICS PVT.LTD. ASST.YEAR 2006-07 - 5 - !'#$%$' / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. )*+ , / CONCERNED CIT 4. , ( ) / THE CIT(A)-VI, AHMEDABAD 5. /01 ((*+ , *+# , ) / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. 145 6 / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, / ( //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION ..11.8.2016 (DICTATION-PAD 6 PAGES ATTACHED AT THE END OF THIS APPEAL-FILE) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 12.8.16 3. OTHER MEMBER 4. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S.16.8.16 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 16.8.16 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ... 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER