Sri Y Venugopala Rao, Visakhapatnam V. The Ad CIT, Range-5, Visakhapatnam

ITA 365/VIZ/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7221 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-02-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 16-12-2010
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 22-06-2009
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D S SUNDER SINGH
• Keywords: Corroborative evidences

Judgement Text

ITANO.365 OF 2009 Y. VENUGOPALA RAO VISAKHAPATNAM PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BR BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 365/VIZAG/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 Y. VENUGOPALA RAO, VISAKHAPATNAM VS. ADD.CIT RANGE-5 VISAKHAPATNAM (APPELLANT) PAN NO: ABJPY 3065 H (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI G.V.N. HARI, CA RESPONDENT BY: SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, SR.DR ORDER PER SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27.04.2009 PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A), VISAKHAPATNAM AND IT RELATES TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS ASSAILING THE DECISION OF L EARNED CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF 50% OF EXPENSES MADE BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER FROM OUT OF THE EXPENSES OF RS.7,09,342/- CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE FACTS RELATING TO THE ISSUE ARE SET OUT IN BRIEF. THE ASSESSEE IS A PROFESSIONAL CRICKET PLAYER. WHILE FINALIZING THE ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, THE ASSESSING OFFI CER DISALLOWED 50% OF THE FOLLOWING EXPENSES AS UNREASONABLE. BOARDING AND LODGING RS.1,17,342/- CONSUMABLES RS.1,84,560/- TRAVELLING RS.1,14,470/- NET PRACTICE EXPENSES RS.2,92,970/- ------------------- RS.7,09,342/- ========== THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT SUCCESSFUL ON THIS ISSUE IN TH E APPEAL FILED BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A). HENCE THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BE FORE US. ITANO.365 OF 2009 Y. VENUGOPALA RAO VISAKHAPATNAM PAGE 2 OF 2 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND CARE FULLY PERUSED THE RECORD. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE CO ULD NOT PRODUCE ANY SUPPORTING EVIDENCE TO PROVE EXPENDITURE CLAIMS CIT ED ABOVE. HENCE THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE IMPUGNED ADDITION BY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO DISCHARGE THE ONUS PLACED UP ON THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE CLAIM. BEFORE US, IT WAS REPRESENTED THAT THE ASSESSEE, BEING A PROFESSIONAL CRICKETER, WAS CONST RAINED TO UNDER TAKE TRAVEL ON AN EXTENSIVE SCALE AND HENCE THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PROPERLY KEEP THE RELEVANT VOUCHERS. IN OUR VIEW, THE REASO N CITED BY THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE TAKEN AS AN EXCUSE FOR NON-MAINTENANCE OF THE RELEVANT VOUCHERS IN SUPPORT OF THE EXPENDITURE CLAIMS. AS OBSERVED B Y LEARNED CIT(A), IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF ANY ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE GEN UINENESS OF THE EXPENSES CLAIMED BY HIM. HOWEVER, CONSIDERING THE PRACTICA L DIFFICULTIES EXPRESSED BY THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE DISALL OWANCE BE RESTRICTED TO 40% OF THE IMPUGNED EXPENSES AND IN OUR VIEW, IT WO ULD MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PART LY ALLOWED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 4 TH FEBRUARY, 2011. SD/- SD/- (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) (B R BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PVV/SPS VISAKHAPATNAM, DATE: 04-02-2011 COPY TO 1 SHRI Y. VENUGOPALA RAO, D.NO.26 - 16 - 33/1 CHAITANYANAGAR, GAJUWAKA, VISAKHAPATNAM 2 THE ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 5, VISAKHAPAT NAM 3 4. THE CIT 1, VISAKHAPATNAM THE CIT(A), VISAKHAPATNAM 5 THE DR, ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM. 6 GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM