The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Kakinada V. Sri Ramadas Motor Transport Limited, Kakinada

ITA 385/VIZ/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5931 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-03-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 30-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K V N CHARYA
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Bad and doubtful debts

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE SHRI J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, AM AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM ITA NO.385/VIZAG/2013 : ASST.YEAR 2009-2010 THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX CIRCLE - 1 KAKINADA. VS. M/S.RAMADAS MOTOR TRANSPORT LIMITED 20-1-8, SUBHASH ROAD KAKINADA. PAN : AADCS1196B. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) CO NO.116/VIZAG/2013 : ASST.YEAR 2009-2010 M/S.RAMADAS MOTOR TRANSPORT LIMITED 20-1-8, SUBHASH ROAD KAKINADA. VS. THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX CIRCLE - 1 KAKINADA. ( CROSS OBJECTOR ) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI K.V.N.CHARYA, CIT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI G.V.N.HARI DATE OF HEARING : 03.03 .2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05 .0 3 .2014 O R D E R PER J.SUDHAKAR REDDY (AM) : THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE REVENUE DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), VISAKHAPATNAM , DATED 19.03.2013, ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THE CIT(A) ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF TH E CASE. 2. THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE RECORDED REASONS FOR AD MISSION OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSE E DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS UNDER RULE 46-A INDEPENDENTLY FIRST AND THEN TO REMAND THE SAME TO THE FILE OF AO. 3. THE POWERS OF CIT(A) ARE COTERMINOUS WITH THAT O F THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE VERIFIED THE FACTS INDEPENDENTLY. 4. THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE SUSTAINED THE ADDITION IN RESPECT OF THE BAD DEBTS WRITTEN OFF AS THE ASSESSE E DID NOT FILE ITA NO.385 & CO 116/VIZAG/2013 M/S.RAMADAS MOTOR TRANSPORT LTD. 2 THE REQUIRED DETAILS DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMEN T PROCEEDINGS. 2. THE CROSS OBJECTION IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A). 3. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS. THE PITH AND SU BSTANCE OF THE ARGUMENT OF THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE IS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED DETAILS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER, AS TO WHETHER (A) THE AMOUNT IS TAKEN IN THE ACCOUNT WHILE COMPUTING THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE EARLIER YEAR, AND (B) WHETHER IT IS WRITTEN OFF AS IRRECOVERABLE IN ITS B OOKS DURING THE YEAR. HE CONTENDED THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A), WITHOUT GOING INTO THIS AS PECT, HAS WRONGLY ADJUDICATED THE MATTER. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, ON TH E OTHER HAND, SUBMITS THAT THESE WERE NOT THE ISSUES ON WHICH DISALLOWANCE WAS MADE AND THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS SPECIFICALLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL BY FOLLO WING THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURTS ORDERS. THUS HE POINTED OUT THAT NO ADDITIO NAL EVIDENCES WERE FILED. ON GOING THROUGH THE PAPERS ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT TH E LEARNED CIT(A) HAS STATED THAT THE BAD DEBT WRITTEN OFF ON ACCOUNT OF SALES / SERV ICE WHICH WERE OFFERED TO TAXATION AT THE TIME OF RAISING THE INVOICES IN EARLIER YEAR S. THIS FACTUAL FINDING OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) CANNOT BE DISTURBED WITHOUT ANY MATERIAL TO THE CONTRARY. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ALSO STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS WRITTEN OFF T HE BAD DEBT IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AFTER EXAMINING THE BAD DEBT ACCOUNT FILED BEFORE HIM. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF TRF LIMITED VS. CIT [(2010) 323 ITR 397 (SC)] IS IN FAVOUR OF THE A SSESSEE. APPLYING THE PROPOSITION THEREIN, THE FINDING OF THE FIRST APPEL LATE AUTHORITY HAS TO BE UPHELD. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. WE FIND THAT THERE IS NO ADDITI ONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND HENCE GROUND NO.2 IS MISCONCEIVED. 3.1 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED AND THE CROSS OBJECTIONS ARE ALSO DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS IN VIEW OF OUR DECISION IN THE REVENUES APPEAL. ITA NO.385 & CO 116/VIZAG/2013 M/S.RAMADAS MOTOR TRANSPORT LTD. 3 4. IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUES APPEAL AS WELL AS A SSESSEES CROSS OBJECTION ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 5 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2014. SD/- SD/- ( SAKTIJIT DEY ) (J.SUDHAKAR REDDY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VISAKHAPATNAM; DATED : 5 TH MARCH, 2014. DEVDAS* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT, VISAKHAPATNAM . 4. CIT(A) VISAKHAPATNAM . 5. DR, ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// (SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY) ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM