Mukesh Khandelwal, CHENNAI V. ITO Non Corporate Ward 5(3), CHENNAI

ITA 2801/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5068 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 28-09-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . !' , $ % BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.2801/CHNY/2018 ' (' / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2015-16 SHRI MUKESH KHANDELWAL, 34, KASI CHETTY STREET, SOWCARPET, CHENNAI - 600 079. PAN : AAIPM 5684 N V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD - 5(3), CHENNAI - 600 006. (*+/ APPELLANT) (,-*+/ RESPONDENT) *+ . / / APPELLANT BY : SHRI N. VIJAY KUMAR, CA SHRI H. YESHWANTH KUMAR, CA ,-*+ . / / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT 0 . 1$ / DATE OF HEARING : 08.05.2019 2!( . 1$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17.05.2019 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -5, CHENNA I, DATED 29.06.2018 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED SEVERAL GROUNDS. THE AS SESSEE, DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, FILED AN AFFIDAVIT SA YING THAT GROUNDS 2 I.T.A. NO.2801/CHNY/18 NO.1, 2 & 3 ARE WITHDRAWN. IN VIEW OF THIS AFFIDAV IT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, PRAYING FOR PERMISSION OF THIS TRIBUNAL T O WITHDRAW THE SPECIFIC GROUNDS, THE GROUNDS NO.1, 2 & 3 ARE DISMI SSED AS WITHDRAWN. NOW, WHAT REMAINS IS GROUNDS NO.4, 5 & 6. GROUND NO.4 IS WITH REGARD TO ADDITION OF 22,18,592/-. GROUND NO.5 IS ONLY TO SUPPORT THE GROUND NO.4. GROUND NO.6 IS ONLY WI TH REGARD TO LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234A AND 234C OF THE INCO ME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). 3. COMING TO THE ADDITION OF 22,18,592/-, SHRI H. YESHWANTH KUMAR, THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE, SUB MITTED THAT THE ASSESSEES IE CODE WAS MISUSED BY SOME UNKNOWN PERS ONS FOR IMPORT OF MATERIAL. THEREFORE, ACCORDING TO THE LD . REPRESENTATIVE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER CAME TO A CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE PAID TO THE CENTRAL EXCISE TO THE TUNE OF 19,38,386/- AND ALSO PAID CUSTOMS DUTY 2,80,206/-. ON A QUERY FROM THE BENCH WHEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER RECEIVED INFORMATION WITH REGARD TO PAYMENT OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS DUTY BY USING THE ASSESS EES IE CODE, WHAT ACTION THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN TO FIND OUT THE CORRECT PERSON WHO HAS MISUSED THE IE CODE? THE LD. REPRESENTATIV E VERY FAIRLY SUBMITTED THAT AS ON TODAY, NO ACTION WAS TAKEN. 3 I.T.A. NO.2801/CHNY/18 4. WE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ALS O. FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IT APPEARS THAT THE PAYMENT OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS DUTY WAS BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE A SSESSEE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE YEAR 2016. NOW WE ARE IN 2019. FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT TAKEN ANY AC TION AGAINST THE PERSON WHO WAS SAID TO HAVE MISUSED THE ASSESSEES IE CODE. WHEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER RECEIVED INFORMATION WIT H REGARD TO EXPORT, IMPORT DATA FROM THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY, T HE ASSESSEE COULD NOT GIVE ANY PROPER EXPLANATION. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS RIGHTLY MADE ADDITION. IF THE IE CODE WAS MISUSED AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFO RE THIS TRIBUNAL, IT IS FOR THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN HOW AND BY WHOM IT WAS MISUSED. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY SUCH EXPLANATION, T HE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT HIS IE CODE WAS MISUSED HAS NO MERIT AT ALL. THEREFORE, THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS RIGHTLY CONFIRMED T HE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THIS TRIBUNAL DO NOT FIN D ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES A ND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS CONFIRMED. 5. NOW COMING TO LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234 A AND 234C OF THE ACT, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPIN ION THAT LEVY OF 4 I.T.A. NO.2801/CHNY/18 INTEREST IS MANDATORY. HENCE, THIS TRIBUNAL FINDS NO MERIT IN THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, THE OR DERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES ARE CONFIRMED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 17 TH MAY, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (. !' ) ( . . . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (N.R.S. GANESA N) $ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 4 /DATED, THE 17 TH MAY, 2019. KRI. . ,156 76(1 /COPY TO: 1. *+ /APPELLANT 2. ,-*+ /RESPONDENT 3. 0 81 () /CIT(A)-5, CHENNAI-34 4. PRINCIPAL CIT-9, CHENNAI 5. 69 ,1 /DR 6. :' ; /GF.