Rakesh Kumar, Ranchi V. ITO,Ward-2(4), Ranchi

ITA 315/RAN/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8380 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 01-10-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NISHA SINGHMARR J
• Assessee Lawyers: ANAND PASARI; NITIN PASARI
• Keywords: Liquidation
• Section: 143(3); 143(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER& MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 315/RAN/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15) RAKESH KUMAR VASANT VIHAR, ROAD NO. 4 H. NO. 402, HARMU HOUSING COLONY, RANCHI- 834001. VS. ITO WARD-2(4) RANCHI JHARKHAND [PAN NO. ARM PK9 898 H] ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : SHRI NITIN PASARI & ANAND PASARI, ADV. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI NISHA SINGHMARR , J CIT ( D.R. ) DATE OF HEARING 06 . 1 1 .2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 22.01.2020 O R D E R PER MS. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: THE INSTANT APPEAL AT THE BEHEST OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31.03.2018 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEAL S), RANCHI, JHARKHAND ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER DATED 29.12.2016 PASSED UN DER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT (HEREINAFTER REFERRED AS TO THE ACT ) PASSED BY THE ITO WARD-2(3), RANCHI FOR A.Y. 2014-15. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL FILED ITS RETURN O N 30.03.2015 SHOWING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 7,09,200/- DERIVES FROM SALARY WHICH WAS PROCESSED UNDER SECTION 143(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THE QUESTION OF ITA NO.315/RAN/2018 RAKESH KUMAR VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2014-15 - 2 - CONTROVERSY IS REGARDING THE PAYMENT MADE TO THE AS SESSEE BY ONE ERA INFRA ENGINEERING LTD. WHICH HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN BY THE AS SESSEE AS OBSERVED BY THE LD. AO AND ADDITION WAS MADE TO THE TUNE OF RS. 16,08,744/- THEREON. THE SAME WAS FURTHER CONFIRMED BY THE FIRST APPELLA TE AUTHORITY. HENCE, THE INSTANT APPEAL BEFORE US. 3. HEARD THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT SUCH AMOUNT HA S NOT BEEN PAID BY ERA INFRA ENGINEERING LTD. AND HENCE CANNOT BE ADDE D IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS REFLECTED AT PAGE 4 OF THE DOCUMEN TS BEING THE STATEMENTS BY ERA INFRA ENGINEERING LTD. AS PROVIDED BY ASSESSEE THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS. 1,84,940/-, 1,84,940/- AND 1,84,939/- WAS PAID TO T HE ASSESSEE ON 24.09.2013, 02.11.2013 AND 30.11.2013 RESPECTIVELY BY ERA INFRA ENGINEERING LTD. DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDING THE ASSE SSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY THAT THE SAID IRA INFRA ENGINEERING LTD. HAS GONE INTO LIQUIDATION AND THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT RECEIVED THE SALARY FROM THE SAID COMPANY EXCEPT THE AMOUNT MENTIONED ABOVE WHICH IS ALSO REFLECTED FROM THE STATEMENT OF ERA INFRA ENGINEER ING LTD. AS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. WHEN THE SALARY HAS ACTUALLY NOT REC EIVED BY THE ASSESSEE WE FIND THE SAME OUGHT HAVE NOT BEEN TAXED BY THE AUTH ORITIES BELOW AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AND, THEREFORE, WE FIND NO JUSTIFICATION I N MAKING ADDITION OF THE DIFFERENCE AMOUNT OF RS. 16,08,744/- MERELY ON THE FACT THAT THE SAME IS RECEIVABLE. ITA NO.315/RAN/2018 RAKESH KUMAR VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2014-15 - 3 - IN THIS REGARD, WE ALSO CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE J UDGMENT RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE PASSED BY THE DELHI BENCH IN THE MA TTER OF VIKASH YADAV VS. ITO, WARD-2, REWARI WHERE IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT WHEN THE ACTUAL PAYMENT HAS NOT MADE TO THE ASSESSEE OR NO MATERIAL IS BEING AVAILABLE SHOWING REFLECTION IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR BANK STATEMENT OF HAVING BEING PAID THE ADDITION CANNOT BE MADE. RESPECTFULLY, RELYING UPON THE SAID RATIO AS LAID DOWN BY THE SAID JUDGMENT WE FIND NO JUSTIFICATION IN MAKING THE ADD ITION AGAINST THE ASSESSEE ON THE AMOUNT, NEVER RECEIVED BY THE ASSES SEE FROM ERA INFRA ENGINEERING LTD. AND, THUS, QUASHED THE ABOVE OF AD DITION. THE LD. AO IS DIRECTED TO GIVE RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE AS ADJUDICA TED AS ABOVE. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 22/01/2020 SD/- SD/- (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) (MS. MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 22/01/2020 TANMAY, SR. PS TRUE COPY / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 5. , ! ' , #$%% / DR, ITAT, RANCHI 6. &' () / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, (SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY) / ITAT, RANCHI