The ITO, Ward-1(1), Guntur V. Sri Chalamalasetty Raveendra Babu, Guntur

ITA 4/VIZ/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6906 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 20-04-2011
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 10-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D S SUNDER SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: J RADHA KISHORE
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 40A(3)

Judgement Text

ITA NO 4 OF 2011 CHALAMALASETTY RAVEENDRA BABU GUNT UR PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BR BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 4 /VIZAG/ 20 11 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 8 - 09 ITO WARD - 1(1) GUNTUR VS. CHALAMALASETTY RAVEENDRA BABU, GUNTUR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO:AFUPC 2330 Q ASSESSEE BY: SHRI J. RADHA KISHORE , CA DEPARTMENT BY: SHRI D.S.SUNDER SINGH, SR.DR ORDER PER SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE CIT (A) MAINLY ON TWO GROUNDS. ONE IS WITH REGARD TO THE VI OLATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 46A OF THE IT RULES AND THE OTHER IS WITH REGA RD TO THE DISALLOWANCE OF PAYMENT U/S 40A(3) OF THE ACT. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, THE LD DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS INVITED OUT ATTENTION TO THE FAC T THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE THE INDIVIDUAL PAYMENTS TO THE EXTENT OF RS.26,05,5 10/- THEREFORE VIOLATED THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.40A(3) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS RIGHTLY INVOKED THE SAID PROVISIONS AND MADE THE DISALLOWANCES. THE LD DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FURTHER CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE S TATEMENT CONTENDING THEREIN THAT THE INDIVIDUAL PAYMENTS WERE LESS THAN RS.20,0 00/- ON EACH OCCASION AND THE FINAL VOUCHERS WERE OBTAINED FOR THE ENTIRE PER IOD COVERING THEREIN AND THE FINAL VOUCHERS IS ONLY ENTERED IN THE A/C BEFORE TH E CIT (A). THE CIT (A) DID NOT CONFRONT THE SAID STATEMENT AND THE VOUCHERS TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HAVING ACCEPTED THIS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, THE CIT (A) DELE TED THE ADDITION. THE LD DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FURTHER CONTENDED THAT THE CIT (A) HAS ACCEPTED ITA NO 4 OF 2011 CHALAMALASETTY RAVEENDRA BABU GUNT UR PAGE 2 OF 3 THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BEFORE HIM WITHOUT VE RIFYING THE SAME. THEREFORE, THE MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF T HE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR NECESSARY VERIFICATION. 3. THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ON THE OTHER HAN D HAS FILED A COPY OF THE LEDGER A/C IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION THAT HE HAS OBTAINED THE VOUCHERS FOR A PARTICULAR PERIOD AND THAT VOUCHERS ARE MORE THAN R S.20,000/- WHEREAS THE INDIVIDUAL VOUCHERS ARE LESS THAN RS.20,000/-. THER EFORE, THERE IS NO VIOLATION OF PROVISIONS OF SEC.40A(3) OF THE ACT. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDER OF THE LOWE R AUTHORITIES AND THE COPY OF THE LEDGER A/C FILED BEFORE US AND ON A CAR EFUL PERUSAL WE FIND THAT UNDISPUTEDLY THERE WERE SO MANY ENTRIES OF PAYMENT OF MORE THAN RS.20,000/- AND THESE ENTRIES WERE STATED TO BE FOR A PARTICULA R PERIOD. BUT FROM THE CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE ENTRIES IT IS NOT CLEAR WHETHER THE INDIVIDUAL ENTRIES EXCEEDS THE PRESCRIBED LIMITS OR NOT. MOREOVER THESE EVIDENCES WERE FILED BY THE CIT (A) AND THE CIT (A) DID NOT CONFRONT THE SAME TO THE ASSESS ING OFFICER. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT TH IS ISSUE REQUIRES FRESH ADJUDICATION BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. WE ACCORDING LY SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO EXAMINE ALL VOUCHERS AND THE INDIVIDUA L ENTRIES BY MAKING NECESSARY VERIFICATION. IF THE INDIVIDUAL ENTRIES ARE FOUND T O BE LESS THAN RS.20,000/-, PROVISIONS OF SEC.40A(3) SHOULD NOT BE INVOKED FOR MAKING DISALLOWANCE. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2/6/2011. SD/- SD/- (BR BASKARAN) (SUNIL K UMAR YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PVV/SPS VISAKHAPATNAM, DATE: 2 ND JUNE, 2011. ITA NO 4 OF 2011 CHALAMALASETTY RAVEENDRA BABU GUNT UR PAGE 3 OF 3 COPY TO 1 THE ITO, WARD - 1(1) GUNTUR 2 SHRI CHALAMALASETTY RAVEENDRA BA BU, S/O SRI NAGESWARA RAO, F.NO.105, RISHI VALLEY HOMES, OPP: ITC BOARD, GUNTU R 3 4. THE CIT GUNTUR THE CIT(A),GUNTUR 5 THE DR, ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM. 6 GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM