Radha Kishan Somani HUF, Kolkata V. A.C.I.T., CC-IV, Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 2838/KOL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 83086 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 23-12-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: B C JAIN F

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO.: 2838/ KOL. / 2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-2011 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA SMC BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.: 2838/ KOL./ 2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-2011 RADHA KISHAN SOMANI, HUF........................... ........APPELLANT 143/1/1, COTTON STREET, KOLKATA-700 007 [PAN : AADHR 3764 B] -VS.- ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,.......... RESPONDENT CENTRAL CIRCLE-IV, KOLKATA AAYAKAR POORVA, KOLKATA APPEARANCES BY: SHRI B.C. JAIN, F.C.A., FOR THE APPELLANT MD. GAYASUDDIN ANSARI, JCIT, SR. D.R., FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : AUGUST 22, 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : 02.09.2014 O R D E R PER SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ARISING OUT O F THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), CENTRAL-I, KO LKATA IN APPEAL NO. 354/CC-IV/CIT(A)C-I/12-13 DATED 05.09.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. THE FIRST ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS AG AINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING ADDITION OF UNDISCLOSED STOCK AT RS.1,14,716/-. 3. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GONE THRO UGH THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. I FIND THAT A SURVEY WAS CONDUCTED AT THE I.T.A. NO.: 2838/ KOL. / 2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-2011 PAGE 2 OF 3 BUSINESS PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 05.11.2009. TH E ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS REQUIRE D THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE STOCK FOUND FROM THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE DURING SURVEY AT RS.1,14,716/-. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESS EE CONTENDED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT STOCK FOUND IN SURVEY WA S RECORDED IN THE REGULAR STOCK REGISTER AND STOCK REGISTER IS LYING IN THE CUSTODY OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED, THAT IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT FOR THE ASSESSEE TO SIMPLY STATE THAT STOCK REGISTER WA S LYING IN THE CUSTODY OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION. 4. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), WHO ALSO CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER EXACTLY ON THE SAME REASONING. 5. I FIND THAT THE ASSESSEES CLAIM IS THAT THE ENT IRE STOCK FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY BY DEPARTMENTAL TEAM WAS RECOR DED IN THE STOCK REGISTER AMOUNTING TO RS.1,14,716/-. BUT THE ASSESS ING OFFICER HAS NOT ALLOWED ANY OPPORTUNITY OR STOCK REGISTER WAS NEVER CONFRONTED TO THE ASSESSEE. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, IT CAN EASILY BE P RESUMED THAT THE STOCK RECORDED IN THE STOCK REGISTER, WHICH WAS NOT ALLOW ED EXCESS BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, I TREAT T HE STOCK AS EXPENDITURE AND DELETE THE ADDITION. 6. THE NEXT ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS AGA INST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF TELEPHONE EXPENSES AT RS.10,000/-. 7. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND GONE THRO UGH THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. I FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED TELEPHONE EXPENSES AT RS.50,000/- AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER M ADE DISALLOWANCE ON AD HOC BASIS AND HENCE ACCORDING TO HIM, THE PERSON AL USER CANNOT BE RULED OUT. LD. CIT(APPEALS) ALSO CONFIRMED THE ACTI ON OF THE ASSESSING I.T.A. NO.: 2838/ KOL. / 2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-2011 PAGE 3 OF 3 OFFICER BY STATING THAT THE DISALLOWANCE @ 20% IS N EITHER EXCESSIVE NOR UNREASONABLE. I FIND THAT THERE IS NO REASON FOR DI SALLOWANCE JUST AD HOC DISALLOWANCE WHICH IS NOT PERMITTED. IN SUCH CIRCUM STANCES, I DELETE THE DISALLOWANCE AND ALLOW THIS ISSUE OF ASSESSEES APP EAL. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2014. SD/- MAHAVIR SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) KOLKATA, THE 2 ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2014 COPIES TO : (1) RADHA KISHAN SOMANI, HUF, 143/1/1, COTTON STREET, KOLKATA-700 007 (2) ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-IV, KOLKATA AAYAKAR POORVA, KOLKATA (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ETC ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.