Ravindra Sadh, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 298/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7443 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 18-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SURENDER PAL
• Assessee Lawyers: DINESH SHARMA
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Set aside
• Section: 22

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH F NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.298/DEL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 RAVINDRA SADH, C-140, EAST OF KAILASH, NEW DELHI. VS. ITO, WARD-30(5), NEW DELHI. TAN/PAN: AAZPS 5029C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: MS. BHARTI SHARMA, CA & SHRI DINESH SHARMA, ADV. RESPONDENT BY: SHRI SURENDER PAL, SR.D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 22 10 2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 17 01 2020 O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.: THE AFORESAID APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 31.03.2015, PASSED BY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-X, NEW DELHI F OR THE QUANTUM OF ASSESSMENT PASSED U/S.143(3) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE DISALLOWANCE OF FOREIGN TRAVELLING EXPENSES OF RS.10,89,106/- AND ADDITION OF RS.1,13, 82,721/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOAN. 2. THE FACTS IN BRIEF QUA THE ISSUE INVOLVED ARE TH AT ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF EXPORT OF GA RMENTS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS CLAIM ED FOREIGN I.T.A. NO.298/DEL/2017 2 TRAVELLING EXPENSES OF RS.10,89,106/- AND FOR THE P URPOSE OF BUSINESS FOR EXPORT OF GARMENTS AND HAS UNDERTAKEN FOREIGN TRAVEL TO MEET ITS CUSTOMERS AND DO MARKET SURVEY, ETC. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS ONLY SUBM ITTED BILLS AND VOUCHERS RELATING TO AIR TICKET TO THE EXTENT O F RS.1,15,400/- ONLY AND SOME CASH MEMO RELATING TO E XCHANGE OF FOREIGN CURRENCY. AS PER THE ASSESSING OFFICER T HE ASSESSEE COULD NOT SUBMIT ANY PROOF OF MEETING/CONFERENCE ET C. AND ACCORDINGLY, HE DISALLOWED ENTIRE EXPENDITURE OF RS.10,89,106/-. HE FURTHER NOTED THAT ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN UNSECURED LOAN AMOUNTING TO RS.1,13,82,721/- FOR WH ICH ASSESSEE COULD NOT SUBMIT ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES AND ACCORDINGLY SAME WAS ADDED U/S.68. 3. LD. CIT (A) FIRST OF ALL NOTED THAT VARIOUS NOTI CES WERE SENT TO THE ASSESSEE DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDIN GS WHEREIN MOST OF THE NOTICES REMAINED UNCOMPLIED WITH. THE D ETAILS OF WHICH HAVE BEEN TABULATED BY HIM AT PAGES 3 AND 4 O F THE APPELLATE ORDER. ACCORDINGLY, HE CAME TO THE CONCLU SION THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOTHING TO CORROBORATE HIS CLAIM WITH DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES IN SPITE OF SUFFICIENT OPPORT UNITIES. ACCORDINGLY, HE HAS CONFIRMED BOTH THE ADDITIONS MA DE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. BEFORE US, LD. COUNSEL HAS SUBMITTED THAT, IN SO FAR AS DISALLOWANCE OF FOREIGN TRAVELLING IS CONCERNED, AS SESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THE DETAILS OF FOREIGN TRAVELLING ALONG W ITH DETAILS OF EXPENDITURE WHICH WAS FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER I.T.A. NO.298/DEL/2017 3 VIDE LETTER DATED 03.02.2015 ALONG WITH PARTY-WISE FOREIGN TRAVELLING ALLOWANCE. HE HAS STATED THAT FOREIGN VI SIT HAS BEEN DONE TO INTERACT WITH THE CUSTOMER AND TO BOOKS ORD ERS. 5. ON THE ISSUE OF UNSECURED LOAN, HE SUBMITTED THA T ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED SUM OF RS.92,12,509/- FROM 23 PARTIES AND HAD PAID INTEREST @ 9.6 PER ANNUM FROM VARIOUS ENTITIES ENGAGED IN SIMILAR BUSINESS OF EXPORTS AND ALL THE LOANS HAVE BEEN REPAID BACK IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS AND ALSO F ILED A DETAIL OF LOAN TAKEN, INTEREST PAID THEREON AND THE DATES OF REPAYMENT ETC. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE H AS ENGAGED CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT TO REPRESENT THE CASE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND HAS NO KNOWLEDGE OF INCOM E TAX PROCEEDINGS. HOWEVER FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, HE CAME TO KNOW THAT IT WAS ALMOST AN EX-PARTE ORDER AND NO PR OPER REPRESENTATION WAS MADE AND SINCE ASSESSEE WAS TRAV ELLING FOR MOST OF THE TIME, THEREFORE, THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE LD. CIT (A) COULD NOT BE APPLIED WITH. IN SUPPORT OF HI S CONTENTION, HE HAS ALSO FILED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT AVAILABLE IN MOST OF THE DATES AS HE WAS TRAVELLING ABROAD. LD. COUNSEL HAS FILED THE DETAILS OF TRAVELLING SCHEDUL E OF THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH THE COPY OF PASSPORT AND VISA S TAMP THAT HE GENUINELY COULD NOT RECEIVE ANY NOTICES. HE HAS FILED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES ON BOTH THE ISSUES SEPARATELY. 6. LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, STRONGLY RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND LD. CIT (A) AND SUBMITTED THAT DESPITE SO MANY OPPORTUNITY, ASSESSEE COULD NO T I.T.A. NO.298/DEL/2017 4 SUBSTANTIATE HIS CASE, AND THEREFORE, ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHOULD BE SUSTAINED. 7. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND ON PERUSAL OF THE RELEVANT FINDINGS GIVEN IN THE IMPUGNED ORDERS, WE FIND THAT ON BOTH THE STAGES, ASSESSEE COULD NOT FURNISH PROP ER DETAILS AND DOCUMENTS TO SUBSTANTIATE THE FOREIGN TRAVELLIN G EXPENSES AS WELL AS UNSECURED LOAN RECEIVED FROM VARIOUS PAR TIES. LD. COUNSEL HAS GIVEN A VERY DETAILED REASONING THAT HO W ASSESSEE COULD NOT RECEIVE THE NOTICES SENT FROM OFFICE OF L D. CIT (A). HE WAS TOTALLY DEPENDENT UPON THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT WHO EITHER COULD NOT REPRESENT THE CASE PROPERLY OR DID NOT RECEIVE ANY NOTICE OF HEARING. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE FEEL THAT MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE A SSESSING OFFICER, TO EXAMINE ALL THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FI LED BEFORE US ON BOTH THE ISSUES AND DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN A CCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING DUE AND EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE SHALL ENSURE THAT ON THE DATE OF HEARING GIVEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, HE SHOULD M AKE DUE COMPLIANCE. ACCORDINGLY, THE GROUNDS RAISED BEFORE US ARE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17 TH JANUARY, 2020. SD/- SD/- [G.S. PANNU] [AMIT SHUKLA] VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 17 TH JANUARY, 2020