Manoj Kumar Bhaiya, Kolkata V. ITO, Ward - 24(1), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 42/KOL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 99723 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 12-01-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUCHETA CHATTOPADHYAY JCITSR
• Assessee Lawyers: SRIKUMAR BANERJEECA
• Keywords: Salary income
• Section: 37

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH SMC KOLKATA [BEFORE HON BLE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, AM ] ITA NO .42/KOL/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008 - 09 ( A PPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) MANOJ KUMAR BHAIYA - VERSUS - I.T.O., WARD - 24(1 ) , KOLKATA KOLKATA (PAN: ADTPB 8570 E) FOR THE APPELLANT: SHRI SRIKUMAR BANERJEE,CA FOR THE RESPONDENT: SMT.SUCHETA CHATTOPADHYAY, JCIT,SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 26 .08 .2015 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.08.2015. ORDER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - XXIV, KOLKATA FOR A.Y.2008 - 09. 2. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL EARNING INCOME FROM SALARY AND OTHER SOURCES. THE ASSESSEE IS A DIRECTOR IN SOME COMPANIES. THE ASSE SSEE HAD INCURRED CERT AIN EXPENSES THROUGH CREDIT CARD. THE AO QUESTIONED . T HE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED TO THE AO, THAT THIS EXPENDITURE WAS INCURRED FOR BUSINESS PURPOSES OF THE COMPANIES IN WHICH HE WAS A DIRECTOR. AS THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FURNISH THE INFORMAT ION AND EVIDENCE IN TIME, THE AO MADE DISALLOWANCE OF 25% OF THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED THROUGH THE CREDIT CARD ON ADHOC BASIS. 3. ON APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED THE STATEMENT OF THE CREDIT CARD AS WELL AS EVIDENCES BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHO RITY. THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ENHANCED THE DISALLOWANCE BY ISSUING NOTICE U/S 251(2) OF THE ACT. HE CONCLUDED THAT THE WHOLE AMOUNT OF RS.2,68,240/ - IS TO BE DISALLOWED. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. ITA NO. 42/KOL/2015 MANOJ KUMAR BHAIYA A.YR. 2008 - 09 2 4. I HAVE HEARD THE SUBM ISSIONS OF SHRI SRIKUMAR BANERJEE, CA, THE LD. AR APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SMT.SUCHETA CHATTOPADHYAY, JCIT,SR.DR, THE LD. DR APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 5. THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY AT PARAS 2 AND 3 AT PAGE 11 OF HIS ORDER HAS HELD AS FOLLOWS : - THE SUBMISSION OF THE A/R OF THE APPELLANT THAT THESE EXPENSES BELONGS TO M/S. C&E LTD. AND M/S. SULIFICIO LINEA ITALIA (INDIA) PVT. LTD. IS NOT TENABLE BECAUSE THE APPELLANT FAILED TO FILE COPIES OF RESPECTIVE BILLS AGAINST THE EXP ENSES IN QUESTION MADE BY THE APPELLANT BY HIS CREDIT CARD. IT IS NOTICED FORM THE DETAILED FILED BY M/S.C&E LTD. THAT THE COMPANY CLAIMED THESE EXPENSES UNDER THE HEAD OF TRAVELLING AND OTHER EXPENSES AND PERSONAL EXPENSES. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE APPELLAN T IN HIS SUBMISSION CLAIMED THESE EXPENSES (I) SALES PROMOTION RS.26,854/ - , (II) MEDICAL RS.10,000/ - AND (III) TRAVELLING RS.229739/ - . IN THIS WAY THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT IS DIFFERENT. FURTHER, THE DATE WISE EXPENSES ARE NOT REFLECTED IN THE M/S. C&E L TD. IN THE CASE OF M/S. SULIFICIO LINEA (INDIA) PVT. LTD. CLAIMED THAT THE COMPANY DEBITED THESE EXPENSES IN THE HEAD SALES PROMOTION. OTHER THE APPELLANT CLAIMED CARD ANNUAL FEES. THE ABOVE FACTS SHOWS THAT THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT IS NOT GENUIN E THAT THESE EXPENSES BELONGS TO THE M/S. C&E LTD. AND M/S.SULIFICIO LINEA ITALIA (INDIA) PVT. LTD. 6. A PERUSAL OF THE SAME DEMONSTRATES THAT THE COMPANIES HAVE RECORDED THIS EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE, THROUGH HIS CREDIT CARD, IN THEIR B OOKS OF ACCOUNT. THE CIT(A) HAS NOT ONLY CONFIRMED THE DISALLOWANCE, BUT HAS ALSO ENHANCED THE SAME, ON FLIMSY GROUNDS. THE HEAD OF THE EXPENDITURE UNDER WHICH THE COMPANY RECORDS THE SAID EXPENDITURE, IS OF NO RELEVANCE , FOR COMING TO A CONCLUSION AS TO W HETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED UNRECORDED EXPENDITURE. WHEN THE SOURCE IS PROVED , THE QUESTION OF ADDITION DOES NOT ARISE. EVEN OTHERWISE THE ASSESSE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND DOES NOT CLAIM ANY EXPENDITURE U/S 30 TO 37 OF THE ACT AND THIS QUESTION OF DISALLO WANCE DOES NOT ARISE. HENCE I DELETE THE DISALLOWANCE MADE AND ALLOW THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNC ED IN TH E COURT . SD/ - [ J. SUDH AKAR REDDY ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE: 27.08.2015 R.G.(.P.S.) ITA NO. 42/KOL/2015 MANOJ KUMAR BHAIYA A.YR. 2008 - 09 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1 . MANOJ KUMAR BHAIYA, 95, PARK STREET, 2 ND FLOOR, KOLKATA - 700016. 2 I.T.O., WARD - 24(1 ), KOLKAT A. 3 . THE CIT - VII I , KOLKATA 4. THE CIT(A) - XXIV , KOLKATA. 5 . DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA TRUE COPY , BY ORDER, DEPUTY /ASST. REGISTRAR , ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES