M/s Hooghly Traders, Kolkata V. Income Tax Officer-Ward-28(2), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 2544/KOL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5911 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-02-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 09-12-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAYANTA KHANRA SR DR
• Assessee Lawyers: SOUMITA CHOUDHURY
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH SMC KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S.S, GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.2544/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2012-13 M/S HOOGHLY TRADERS 26, KARL MARK SARANI, ROOM NO.-2, KHIDDERPORE, KOLKATA-700 023 [ PAN NO.AABFH 9155 J ] / V/S . INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-28(2), 2 GARIAHAT ROAD (SOUTH) KOLKATA- 700 068 /APPELLANT .. /RESPONDENT /BY APPELLANT SHRI SOUMITA CHOUDHURY, ADVOCATE /BY RESPONDENT SHRI JAYANTA KHANRA, SR-DR /DATE OF HEARING 04-02-2020 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 14-02-2020 /O R D E R THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 , ARISES AGAINST THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-09, KOLKATAS ORDER DATED 28.06.2019 PASSED IN CASE NO.21/CIT(A)-9/WD-28(2)/2015-16/KOL, INVOL VING PROCEEDINGS U/S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT. HEARD SHRI CHOUDHURY REPRESENTING ASSESSEE AND SHRI KHANRA APPEARING AT REVENUES BEHEST. CASE FILE PERUSED. 2. DELAY OF NINETY ONE DAYS IN FILING OF THE INSTA NT LIS IS CONDONED GOING BY ASSESSEES SOLEMN AVERMENTS IN PETITION DATED 09.12 .2019 EXPLAINING REASONS THEREOF TO DELAY IN COMPILATION OF NECESSARY RECORD AND COM MUNICATION GAP WITH THE ARGUING COUNSEL AND ON ACCOUNT OF NON OBJECTION FROM THE R EVENUE SIDE. THE CASE IS NOW TAKEN UP FOR ADJUDICATION ON MERITS. ITA NO.2544/KOL/2019 A.Y. 2012-13 M/S HOOGHLY TRADERS VS. ITO, WD-28(2)KOL. PAGE 2 3. THE ASSESSEES SOLE SUBSTANTIVE GRIEVANCE SEEKS TO REVERSE BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ACTION DISALLOWING 25% OF VEHICLE RUNN ING EXPENSES ALONGWITH REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE OF 25,06,933/- COMING TO 6,02,475/-. SUFFICE TO SAY, BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ALLEGE PERSONAL USAGE OF THE MOTOR VEHI CLE FOR THE PURPOSE OF INVOLVING INVOKING THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE. IT IS NOT IN DI SPUTE THAT NEITHER THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOR THE CIT(A) INDICATE ANY EXCESSIVE ELEME NT IN THE ASSESSEES CLAIM VISI-A- VIS EARLIER AND LATER ASSESSMENT YEARS. IT FURTHER TRANSPIRES THAT THIS TAXPAYER HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO DISCHARGE ITS ONUS OF HAVING USED THE VEHICLE IN QUESTION WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF ITS BUSINESS. I THER EFORE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE THAT A LUMP SUM DISALLOWANCE OF 1,00,000/- OUT OF THAT IN ISSUE OF 6,02,475/- WOULD MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE WITH A RIDER THAT SAME SHALL NOT BE TREATED AS A PRECEDENT IN ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR. NECESSARY COMPUTATION TO FOLLOW AS PER LAW. 4. THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED IN ABOV E TERMS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 14/02/2020 SD/- (S.S. GODARA) JUDIC IAL MEMBER KOLKATA, *DKP/SR.PS - /02/2020 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. /APPELLANT-M/S HOOGHLY TRADERS, 26, KARL MARAX SAR ANI, ROOM 2, KHIDDERPORE , KOLKATA-700 023 2. /RESPONDENT-ITO WARD-28(2), 2, GARIAHAT ROAD (SOUTH ), KOLKATA-700 068 3. ' % / CONCERNED CIT 4. % - / CIT (A) 5. & ))' , ' / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6. + / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , ',