Shri Gautam D.Patel, Ahmedabad V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-9(4), Ahmedabad

ITA 2932/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 68087 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-12-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 19-12-2013
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 26-10-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R K DHANESTA SRDR

Judgement Text

, , , , , , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH D BENCH, AHMEDABAD .., ! '# '# '# '# $ %&, ! BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER #./ I.T.A. NO.2932/AHD/2010 ( ( ')( ( ')( ( ')( ( ')( / / / / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) GAUTAM D.PATEL PROP: SHREE KRISHNA TRAVELS 21, PARSHWANATH TOWERS GURUKUL ROAD MEMNAGAR, AHMEDABAD / VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-9(4) AHMEDABAD-380 015 !* #./+, #./ PAN/GIR NO. : ABCPP 6254 A ( *- / // / APPELLANT ) .. ( ./*- / RESPONDENT ) *- 0 / APPELLANT BY : -NONE- ./*- 1 0 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R.K.DHANESTA, SR.D.R. $'2 1 & / / / / DATE OF HEARING : 19/12/2013 34) 1 & / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31/12/2013 5 / O R D E R PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE LD.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-XV, AHMEDABA D (CIT(A) FOR SHORT) DATED 22/07/2010 PERTAINING TO ASSESSME NT YEAR (AY) 2006- 07. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN PASSING TH E APPELLATE ORDER WHILE PARTLY CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS AND DISALLOWA NCES MADE BY THE A.O. BY GIVING THE FINDING IN ONLY ONE LINE IN A TA BULAR FORM WITHOUT PROPER CONSIDERATION AND APPRECIATION OF THE FACTS AND ELABORATE ITA NO.2932/AHD /2010 GAUTAM D.PATEL VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2006-07 - 2 - SUBMISSIONS AND EVIDENCES FILED DURING THE COURSE O F APPEAL AS WELL AS WITHOUT EVEN DISCUSSING THE SAME IN THE BODY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.7,658/- ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OUT OF OFFICE EXPENSES WITHOUT PROPER CONSIDERATION AND APPRECIATION OF THE FACTS AND EVIDENCES AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE E XPENDITURE BEING HALL RENT FOR CLIENT AND STAFF GET TOGETHER THE QUESTION OF ANY NON-BUSINESS PURPOSE DO NOT ARISE AT ALL AND ACCORDINGLY THE IMP UGNED ADDITION OF RS.7,658/- REQUIRES TO BE DELETED. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN PARTLY CONFIRMING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED C ASH CREDIT U/S.68 OF THE ACT TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 1,60,000/- OUT OF TOTA L ADDITION OF RS.4,38,893/- MADE BY THE A.O. WITHOUT PROPER CONSI DERATION AND APPRECIATION OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND IN A CASU AL MANNER WITHOUT GIVING ANY REASONS. IN VIEW OF FACTS, SUBMISSIONS A ND EVIDENCES FILED COUPLED WITH LEGAL POSITION, THE ENTIRE ADDITION OF RS.4,38,893/- OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN DELETED. 4. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN PARTLY CONFIRMING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED C ASH CREDIT U/S.68 OF THE ACT BEING SUNDRY CREDITORS TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 1,17,069/- OUT OF TOTAL ADDITION OF RS.1,90,324/-MADE BY THE A.O. WITHOUT P ROPER CONSIDERATION AND APPRECIATION OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND IN A CASUAL MANNER WITHOUT GIVING ANY REASONS. IN VIEW OF FACTS, SUBMISSIONS A ND EVIDENCES FILED COUPLED WITH LEGAL POSITION, THE ENTIRE ADDITION OF RS.1,90,324/- OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN DELETED. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND, ALTER, MO DIFY OR DELETE ANY OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS AS WELL AS TO SUBMIT ADDITIONAL G ROUNDS AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 2. NOTICE HAS BEEN ISSUED ON 30/10/2013 FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING ON 19/12/2013 WHICH WAS SENT THROUGH REGISTERED POST ( A.D.) TO THE ASSESSEE (AS PER EVIDENCE ON RECORD RG 21365795 I N) WHICH WAS RETURNED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES WITH REMARKS LE FT. ON THE DATE OF HEARING, NO ONE HAS APPEARED FROM THE SIDE OF APPEL LANT-ASSESSEE. NEITHER THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED ANY FRESH ADDRES S NOR ANY APPLICATION ITA NO.2932/AHD /2010 GAUTAM D.PATEL VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2006-07 - 3 - FOR SEEKING ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN FILED. UNDER THES E CIRCUMSTANCES, WE HAVE NO OPTION BUT TO DISMISS THIS APPEAL SINCE THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING WITH HIS APPEAL. THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT DECISION IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKA VS. CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) AND OF HON'BLE DELHI TRIBUNAL DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (PVT.) LTD. 38 ITD 320 (DELHI) , WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE . 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DI SMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED HER EINABOVE AT CAPTION PAGE SD/- SD/- ( .. ) ($ %&) ! ! ( N.S. SAINI ) ( KUL BHARAT ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 31/12/2013 8.., '.../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS 5 1 .&9 :9)& 5 1 .&9 :9)& 5 1 .&9 :9)& 5 1 .&9 :9)&/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. *- / THE APPELLANT 2. ./*- / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ## & $; / CONCERNED CIT 4. $;() / THE CIT(A)- 5. 9'%< .& , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. <( =2 / GUARD FILE. 5$ 5$ 5$ 5$ / BY ORDER, /9& .& //TRUE COPY// > >> >/ // / #+ #+ #+ #+ ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD