Nalluru Muniswamyraju Giri, Bengaluru V. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-6(2)(1), Bengaluru

ITA 2566/BANG/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5715 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-02-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 01-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: TDS; Set aside
• Section: 13

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA 2566/BANG/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012 13 SHRI. NALLURU MUNISWAMYRAJU GIRI, NO. 16, 1 ST FLOOR, 1 ST MAIN, 5 TH CROSS, HIG COLONY, RMV 2 ND STAGE, BANGALORE 560 094. PAN NO : ABLPG5093P VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 6(2) (1), BMTC BUILDING, 80 FT. ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE 560 095. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI. SANKETH S NAYAK, CA RESPONDENT BY : MR. SHAHNAWAZ UL RAHMAN, JCIT DR DATE OF HEARING : 11 - 02 - 2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14 - 02 - 2020 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST ORDER DATED 14/09/2017, PASSED BY LD. CIT(A), BANGALORE-6, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13, ON FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-6, BENGALURU (LEARNED CIT(A)) HAS ERRED IN FACTS AND IN LAW BY PASSING AN ORDER WHICH IS OPPOSED TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN FACTS AND IN LAW BY ADDING THE DIFFERENCE IN TURNOVER OF RS.8,42,823/- AS OTHER INCOME. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN FACTS AND IN LAW BY NOT ALLOWING EXPENDITURE TO THE TUNE OF NET PROFIT RATIO WHILE ADDING BACK RS. 8,42,823 AS TURNOVER. 4. THE LEARNED CI(A) HAS ERRED IN FACTS AND IN LAW BY DISALLOWING AGRICULTURAL INCOME TO THE TUNE OF RS. 4,95,922.00 AND ADDING THE SAME AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. 5. SUCH OTHER GROUNDS AS MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. PAGE 2 OF 6 ITA 2566/BANG/2017 A. Y : 2012 13 BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER: 2. ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL DERIVING INCOME FROM AGRICULTURE AND OTHER SOURCES. ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION ON 11/12/2012, DECLARING INCOME OF RS.71,18,640/-. RETURN WAS PROCESSED UNDER SECTION 143 (1) OF THE ACT, AND SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY. SUBSEQUENTLY, NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143 (2) WAS ISSUED ALONG WITH NOTICE UNDER SECTION 142 (1) AND QUESTIONNAIRE. IN RESPONSE TO STATUTORY NOTICES, REPRESENTATIVE OF ASSESSEE APPEARED BEFORE LD.AO AND FILED REQUISITE DETAILS AS CALLED FOR. 3. LD. AO OBSERVED THAT, ASSESSEE IS A PROPRIETOR ENGAGED IN BUSINESS OF TELECOM/CIVIL WORK CONTRACTOR. ASSESSEE IS ALSO A DIRECTOR IN A COMPANY BY NAME, M/S. BELL TELESERVICES PVT. LTD.,. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, ASSESSEE WAS CALLED UPON TO FURNISH CERTAIN INFORMATION. ON PERUSAL OF INFORMATION FILED BY ASSESSEE, LD.AO OBSERVED THAT AS PER 26 A-S STATEMENT ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED A SUM OF RS.6,65,823/- FROM M/S. HATHAWAY CABLE AND DATACOM LTD., AND RS.1,77,000/- FROM M/S. POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., WHICH HAS NOT BEEN DECLARED. ACCORDINGLY, LD.AO MADE ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE TO THE EXTENT OF RS.8,42,823/-. LD. AO ALSO CONSIDERED SUM OF RS. 20,61,424/- AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND AGRICULTURAL INCOME ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF RS.12,99,244/-. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD. AO, ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT (A) WHO UPHELD THE OBSERVATIONS OF LD. AO. AGGRIEVED BY ORDER OF LD.CIT(A), ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US NOW. PAGE 3 OF 6 ITA 2566/BANG/2017 A. Y : 2012 13 5. GROUND NO.1 IS GENERAL IN NATURE AND THEREFORE DO NOT REQUIRE ADJUDICATION. 6. GROUND NO.2-3 ARE IN RESPECT OF ADDITION TOWARDS DIFFERENCES IN THE TURNOVER AMOUNTING TO RS.8,42,823/- IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE. LD.AR SUBMITTED THAT, RECEIPTS PERTAIN TO COMPANY IN WHICH ASSESSEE IS A DIRECTOR, AND SUCH RECEIPTS HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED AS INCOME IN THE HANDS OF COMPANY AND HAS BEEN OFFERED TO TAX. LD. AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT TDS IN RESPECT OF THE SAME WAS CLAIMED BY ASSESSEE. ALTERNATIVELY, LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT IN THE EVENT THE SAID AMOUNT IS TREATED AS INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE, CORRESPONDING EXPENDITURE MUST BE ALLOWED, AS OTHERWISE IT WOULD AMOUNT TO DOUBLE TAXATION. 7. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. CIT-DR SUPPORTED THE ORDERS PASSED BY AUTHORITIES BELOW. 8. WE HAVE PERUSED SUBMISSIONS ADVANCED BY BOTH SIDES IN LIGHT OF RECORDS PLACED BEFORE US. IT IS OBSERVED THAT AT PAGE 24-25 OF PAPER BOOK FORM 26 A-S FOR YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION HAS BEEN PLACED. LD. AR POINTED OUT THAT A SUM OF RS.6,65,823/-, AGAINST WHICH TDS IS DEDUCTED BY M/S. HATHAWAY CABLE AND DATACOM LTD., AND SUM OF RS.1,77,000/-, AGAINST WHICH, TDS IS DEDUCTED BY M/S. POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.,. HE REFERRED TO LEDGER ACCOUNT PLACED AT PAGE 27-28 OF M/S. HATHAWAY CABLE DATACOM PVT. LTD., IN THE BOOKS OF M/S. BELL TELESERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., WHEREIN, PAYMENTS RECEIVED BY M/S. BELL TELESERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., IS MENTIONED. IN SCHEDULE 16 OF AUDITED STATEMENT OF M/S. BELL TELESERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., UNDER SALE OF SERVICES, SUM OF RS. 6,48,44,063/- HAS BEEN PAGE 4 OF 6 ITA 2566/BANG/2017 A. Y : 2012 13 RECORDED BY M/S. BELL TELESERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., AGAINST IP MAINTENANCE CHARGES. 9. NOTHING IS PLACED ON RECORD THAT GOES TO ESTABLISH THAT SUM OF RS.1,77,000/- RECEIVED FROM M/S. POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., BY M/S. BELL TELESERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD.,. 10. FURTHER ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT M/S. BELL TELESERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., HAS OFFERED THE SAID SUM FOR TAXATION. IN OUR OPINION, M/S. BELL TELESERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., PROVIDED SERVICES AND RECEIVED PAYMENTS, AGAINST WHICH DEDUCTOR DEDUCTED TDS IN WRONG NAME. WE THEREFORE DIRECT LD.AO TO VERIFY THE SAME FROM RETURNS FILED BY M/S. BELL TELESERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., AND CONSIDER THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO FILE ALL REQUISITE DETAILS IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM. ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND RAISED BY ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 11. GROUND NO. 4 IS IN RESPECT OF DISALLOWING AGRICULTURAL INCOME TO THE EXTENT OF RS.4,95,922/- AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE FILED TITLE DEEDS OF PROPERTIES WHICH DESCRIBE CROP INFORMATION BEFORE AUTHORITIES BELOW. ONLY SUBMISSIONS ADVANCED BY LD. AR WAS THAT THE TITLE DEED SPECIFIES AREA AND THE YIELD SHOULD BE CALCULATED ON THE SAME. 12. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. DR PLACED RELIANCE ON ORDERS PASSED BY AUTHORITIES BELOW. 13. WE HAVE PERUSED SUBMISSIONS ADVANCED BY BOTH SIDES IN LIGHT OF RECORDS PLACED BEFORE US. IT IS OBSERVED THAT, LD. AO DISREGARDED AREA MENTIONED IN TITLE DEEDS AND MODIFIED LAND HELD BY ASSESSEE ON AD HOC BASIS. IT IS OBSERVED THAT ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED CERTAIN PORTION OF COFFEE PAGE 5 OF 6 ITA 2566/BANG/2017 A. Y : 2012 13 PRODUCE AND SUGAR CANE PRODUCE AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE RECEIVED SUM OF RS.15,65,502/- FROM SUGAR CANE PRODUCE, WHICH IS REFLECTED IN BANK STATEMENT. IT IS OBSERVED THAT LD.AO DISREGARDED SUBMISSIONS OF ASSESSEE AND DETAILS OF TITLE DEEDS, AS ASSESSEE HAS NOT SUBMITTED ANY BILLS AND ACCOUNTS THAT WERE MAINTAINED. 14. LD. AO DO NOT DISPUTE WORKINGS ON YIELD PER ACRE AND RATE PER KG PRODUCE PROVIDED BY ASSESSEE. WE ARE THEREFORE INCLINED TO SET ASIDE THIS ISSUE BACK TO LD. AO TO ONCE AGAIN CONSIDER THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE AS THERE IS NOTHING ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT ASSESSEE DID NOT HAVE ANY CULTIVATION DURING THE YEAR. ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO FILE ALL RELEVANT DETAILS IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM. ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND RAISED BY ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. IN THE RESULT APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14 TH FEBRUARY, 2020. SD/- SD/- (A. K. GARODIA) ( BEENA PILLAI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 14 TH FEBRUARY, 2020. /MK/ COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 4. CIT(A) 2. RESPONDENT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE 3. CIT 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. BANGALORE.