M/s Janki Sons, Jalandhar V. Assistant commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar

ITA 31/ASR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7860 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 08-08-2017
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 12-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAHUL DHAWANLD
• Assessee Lawyers: SANDEEP VIJH L D
• Keywords: Gift

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE T RIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR BEFORE SH.T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH.N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 31(ASR)/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 M/S. JANKI SONS, G.T. ROAD, JALANDHAR. PAN:AAEFJ-8527H VS. ASST. CIT, RANGE-III, JALANDHAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. SANDEEP VIJH (L D. CA) RESPONDENT BY: SH. RAHUL DHAWAN (LD. DR) DATE OF HEARING: 08.08.2017 DATE OF PRONOU NCEMENT:24.08.2017 ORDER PER N. K. CHOUDHRY (JM): THE INSTANT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BY FEEL ING AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 06.10.2016 PASSED BY LD. CIT(A)-2, JALANDHAR, FOR ASST. YEAR: 2012-13. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED SOLE GROUND OF APPEAL. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING ESTIMA TED DISALLOWANCE OF RS.1,75,000/- FROM OUT OF FORWARDIN G & DELIVERY EXPENSES AS AGAINST THE SUM OF RS.4,45,315/- DISALL OWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER @ 20% OF THE SAID EXPENSES. THE S UBMISSIONS MADE ON THE ISSUE AND THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THIS YEAR HAVE NOT BEEN PROPERLY APPRECIATED. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME THROUGH E-FI LING ON 30.09.2009 DECLARING THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS.34,79, 642/-. AND I TA NO.31(ASR)/2017 AS ST. YEAR: 2012-13 2 THE SAME WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) ON 22.O3.2014 AND SUBSEQUENTLY, THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY UNDER CASS AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE DETERMINING THE LIABILITY CO MPUTED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNDER: (I) ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OUT OF EXPE NSES CLAIMED UNDER THE HEAD FORWARDING & DELIVERY EXPEN SES RS.4,45,315/- (II) ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OUT OF EXP ENSES CLAIMED UNDER THE HEAD GIFT & SHAGUNS RS.95,654/- (III) ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OUT OF OT HER UN- VOUCHED EXPENSES RS.30,000/- 4. FEELING AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY TH E ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE FILED THE APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A) , WHO PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY GIVING SOME OF THE RELIEFS, HOWEVER, IN RESPECT OF FORWARDING AND DELIVERY EXPENSE S REDUCED THE DISALLOWANCES TO THE TUNE OF RS.1,75,000 ONLY. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES AND ALSO PERUSED TH E MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND IMPUGNED ORDER HEREIN AS IN T HE INSTANT CASE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED 1/5 TH OF THE TOTAL EXPENSES OF RS.22,26,576/- AS CLAIMED UNDER THE SAID HEAD BY THE ASSE SSEE AND DETERMINED THE LIABILITY OF RS.4,45,315/- BY ADDING BACK TO THE TOTAL RETURNED INCOME BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSID ERATION. FURTHER IN APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT PRIM ARY GROUND TAKEN BY THE A.O WAS THAT SELF MADE SUPPORTING VOUCHERS OF THE EXPENSES I TA NO.31(ASR)/2017 AS ST. YEAR: 2012-13 3 CLAIMED UNDER THE HEAD COULD BE PRODUCED IN THE COURSE O F EXAMINATION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND THESE EXPENSES HAVE B EEN INCURRED IN CASH AND THEREFORE, NOT VERIFIABLE. FURTHE R, THE A.O. HAD PLACED HIS RELIANCE ON THE ORDER PASSED BY THE PRECEDING YEAR WHEREIN SIMILAR DISALLOWANCES HAS BEEN MADE, THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS QUA RATIO OF EXPENSES FOUND FOR CE IN THE CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT AS THE EXPENSES CLAIMED UNDE R THESE HEAD IN PROPORTIONED TO SALES HAVE BEEN DECLINED IN THIS YEA R AS COMPARED TO THE PRECEDING YEAR AND ALSO ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCES IN THESE YEAR IN THE NATURE OF THE FACTS AND ALSO FOUND JUSTIFIED TH AT THE SUPPORTING VOUCHERS FOR SUCH EXPENSES COULD NOT BE OBTAINED FROM THE SMALL VOUCHERS, THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) HOLD TO BE FAIR A ND JUSTIFIED TO RESTRICT THE ADDITION TO THE TUNE OF RS.1,75,000/- OUT OF TOTAL ADDITION OF RS.4,45,315/- MADE BY THE A.O. AS WE REALIZED FROM THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS BENCH IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE ITSELF QUA ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 THE DISALLOWANCE WAS RESTRICTED TO THE TUNE OF RS.10% OF THE EXPENSES AS FARE AND REASONABLE. CONSIDERING THE PECU LIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN DEBITED DELIVERY EXPENSES AMOUNTING TO RS.22,26,5 76/- TO THE P&L ACCOUNT AND THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND IT TO BE R EASONABLE TO DISALLOW 1/5 TH OF THE TOTAL EXPENSES, HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) FURTH ER RESTRICTED THE SAID ADDITION ON THAT ACCOUNT AS FAIR AND JUSTIFIED TO RESTRICT TO RS.1,75,000/- WHICH ACCORDING TO OUR MIND CER TAINLY BELOW I TA NO.31(ASR)/2017 AS ST. YEAR: 2012-13 4 THAN 10% OF THE AMOUNT CLAIMED, HENCE, IN THE AFORESAI D FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE DO NOT FOUND ANY INFIRMITY, PERVERSITY AND ILLEGALITY IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) AS THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISE D SOLE GROUND OF APPEAL, THEREFORE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24.08.2017. SD/- SD/- (T. S. KAPOOR) (N.K.CHOUDHRY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIA L MEMBER DATED:24.08.2017. /PK/ PS. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE ASSESSEE: (2) THE (3) THE CIT(A), (4) THE CIT, (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., TRUE COPY BY ORDER