Smt. Banita Majhi, Bhubaneswar V. ITO, Ward-4(2), Bhubaneswar

ITA 425/CTK/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5291 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-12-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 01-11-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D K PRADHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: P R MOHANTY
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

, . . , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI N.S.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 42 5 / CTK /20 1 7 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 1 3 - 20 1 4 ) SMT. BANITA MAJHI, IV/24, CENTRA L REVENUE COLONY, RAJASWA VIHAR, BHUBANESWAR 751007 VS. ITO, WARD - 4 ( 2 ) BHUBANESWAR ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : A GOPM 2517 N ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.R.MOHANTY, AR /REVENUE BY : SHRI D.K.PRADHAN , DR / DATE OF HEARING : 28 / 1 2 /201 7 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 28 / 12 /201 7 / O R D E R TH IS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - 2 , BHUBANE SWAR , DATED 28.7.2017 . 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : - 1. FOR THAT, THE ORDER OF THE FORUM BELOW IS ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL, UNJUSTIFIED AND ERRONEOUS AND HAS BEEN PASSED ON IMPROPER APPLICATION OF MIND, BEING DEVOID OF MERIT AS SUCH DESERVE S TO BE QUASHED IN LIMINE. 2. FOR THAT, THE ADDITION OF RS 15,945/ - TO THE TOTAL INCOME BY DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE CLAIMED TOWARDS 'STAFF WELFARE' ON PRETEXT OF FURTHER VERIFICATION DESERVES TO BE DELETED ON THE GROUND THAT THE EXPENDITURE HAVING IN TRINSIC AND INSEGGREGABLE NEXUS WITH THE WORK UNDERTAKEN BEING SOLELY FOR THE BUSINESS HAS TO BE ALLOWED BEING UNWARRANTED AS PER THE STATUTORY PROVISIONS AND THERE CAN'T BE ANY LUMP SUM ADHOC ESTIMATED DISALLOWANCES WITHOUT BRINGING ANY COGENT EVIDENCES O N RECORD. 3. FOR THAT, THE ADDITION OF RS 26,983/ - TO THE TOTAL INCOME BY DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE CLAIMED TOWARDS 'TRAVELLING EXPENSES' ON PRETEXT OF FURTHER VERIFICATION DESERVES TO BE DELETED ON THE GROUND THAT THE EXPENDITURE HAVING INTRINSIC AN D INSEGGREGABLE NEXUS WITH THE WORK UNDERTAKEN BEING SOLELY FOR THE BUSINESS HAS TO BE ALLOWED BEING UNWARRANTED AS PER THE STATUTORY PROVISIONS AND THERE CAN'T BE ANY LUMP SUM ADHOC ESTIMATED DISALLOWANCES WITHOUT BRINGING ANY COGENT EVIDENCES ON RECORD. ITA NO. 425 /CTK/201 7 2 4. FOR THAT, THE ADDITION OF RS 82,511/ - TO THE TOTAL INCOME BY DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE CLAIMED TOWARDS 'SALARY & WAGES' ON PRETEXT OF FURTHER VERIFICATION DESERVES TO BE DELETED ON THE GROUND THAT THE EXPENDITURE HAVING INTRINSIC AND INSEGGREGABLE NEXUS WITH THE WORK UNDERTAKEN BEING SOLELY FOR THE BUSINESS HAS TO BE ALLOWED BEING UNWARRANTED AS PER THE STATUTORY PROVISIONS AND THERE CAN'T BE ANY LUMP SUM ADHOC ESTIMATED DISALLOWANCES WITHOUT BRINGING ANY COGENT EVIDENCES ON RECORD. 5. FOR THAT, THE ADDITION OF RS 17,204/ - TO THE TOTAL INCOME BY DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE CLAIMED TOWARDS 'DONATION' ON PRETEXT OF FURTHER VERIFICATION DESERVES TO BE DELETED ON THE GROUND THAT THE EXPENDITURE HAVING INTRINSIC AND INSEGGREGABLE NEXUS WITH THE WORK UN DERTAKEN BEING SOLELY FOR THE BUSINESS HAS TO BE ALLOWED. 6. FOR THAT, THE ADDITION OF RS 8,000/ - TO THE TOTAL INCOME BY DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE CLAIMED TOWARDS 'LEGAL FEE' ON PRETEXT OF FURTHER VERIFICATION DESERVES TO BE DELETED ON THE GROUND THAT THE EXPENDITURE HAVING INTRINSIC AND INSEGGREGABLE NEXUS WITH THE WORK UNDERTAKEN BEING SOLELY FOR THE BUSINESS HAS TO BE ALLOWED . 7. FOR THAT, THE ADDITION OF RS 5,035/ - TO THE TOTAL INCOME BY DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE CLAIMED TOWARDS 'MISC EXPENSES ' ON PRETEXT OF FURTHER VERIFICATION DESERVES TO BE DELETED ON THE GROUND THAT THE EXPENDITURE HAVING INTRINSIC AND INSEGGREGABLE NEXUS WITH THE WORK UNDERTAKEN BEING SOLELY FOR THE BUSINESS HAS TO BE ALLOWED . 8. FOR THAT, THE ADDITION OF RS. 51,806/ - ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST PAID TOWARDS CAR LOAN DESERVES TO BE ADJUSTED ON ACCOUNT OF DEPRECIATION ALLOWABLE EVEN THOUGH NOT CLAIMED INADVERTENTLY BEING A LEGITIMATE STATUTORY ALLOWABLE DEDUCTION. 9. FOR THAT, THE ADDITION OF RS 18,985/ - TO THE TOTAL INCOM E BY DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE CLAIMED TOWARDS 'STAMPING CHARGES' ON PRETEXT OF FURTHER VERIFICATION DESERVES TO BE DELETED ON THE GROUND THAT THE EXPENDITURE HAVING INTRINSIC AND INSEGGREGABLE NEXUS WITH THE WORK UNDERTAKEN BEING SOLELY FOR THE BUSINESS HAS TO BE ALLOWED . 10. FOR THAT, THE ADDITION OF RS 37,500/ - TO THE TOTAL INCOME BY DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE CLAIMED TOWARDS 'BONUS' ON PRETEXT OF FURTHER VERIFICATION DESERVES TO BE DELETED ON THE GROUND THAT THE EXPENDITURE HAVING INTRINSIC AND IN SEGGREGABLE NEXUS WITH THE WORK UNDERTAKEN BEING SOLELY FOR THE BUSINESS HAS TO BE ALLOWED . 11. FOR THAT, THE ADDITION OF RS 19,709/ - TO THE TOTAL INCOME BY DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE CLAIMED TOWARDS 'BUSINESS ITA NO. 425 /CTK/201 7 3 PROMOTION EXPENSES' ON PRETEXT OF FURTHER VERIFICATION DESERVES TO BE DELETED ON THE GROUND THAT THE EXPENDITURE HAVING INTRINSIC AND INSEGGREGABLE NEXUS WITH THE WORK UNDERTAKEN BEING SOLELY FOR THE BUSINESS HAS TO BE ALLOWED . 12. FOR THAT, THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD/ALTER/AMEND FURTHE R GROUNDS, IF ANY, AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF APPEAL. 3. I HAVE PERUSED THE ORDER OF CIT(A). I FIND THAT THE CIT(A) HAS OBSERVED THAT HE HAD FIXED THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 09.06.2017 & 24.07.2017 AND NONE OF THE DATE THE ASSESSEE PUT IN AN APPEARANCE BEFO RE HIM OR SUBMITTED ANY WRITTEN ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF HIS GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND, THEREFORE, HE CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AFTER OBSERVING AS UNDER : - 3. DURING THE COURSE OF APPEAL PROCEEDINGS, THE FOLLOWING NOTICES U/S.250 OF THE I.T.ACT. 1961 H AVE BEEN ISSUED. THE STATUS OF COMPLIANCE IS AS BELOW SL.NO. DATE OF NOTICE DATE OF HEARING REMARKS 1. 02.06.2017 09.06.2017 NO COMPLIANCE 2. 12.07.2017 24.07.2017 NO COMPLIANCE 4. AS IT CAN BE SEEN FROM THE ABOVE, THE APPELLANT HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH ANY OF THE NOTICES. ON LAST DATE OF HEARING I.E. ON 24.07.2017, NEITHER THE APPELLANT NOR HER REPRESENTATIVE HAS APPEARED. NO REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN MADE. IT IS THEREFORE HELD THAT THE APPELLANT IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL. THEREFOR E, ALL GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE DISMISSED. 4. I FIND THAT IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A) THOUGH THE CIT(A) HAS MENTIONED THE DATES FOR HEARING OF THE APPEAL BUT HE HAS NOT STATED WHETHER THE NOTICE OF HEARING ISSUED BY HIM TO THE ASSESSEE WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. IN MY CONSIDERED VIEW WITHOUT BRINING ANY SUCH MATERIAL ON RECORD, THE CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PUT IN AN APPEARANCE BEFORE HIM. I , THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CI T(A) AND REMAND THE ITA NO. 425 /CTK/201 7 4 MATTER BACK TO HIS FILE FOR ADJUDICATION OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AFRESH AFTER ALLOWING REASONABLE AND PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT IF THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT COOPERATE WITH THE CIT(A) IN THE S ET ASIDE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE HIM, THE CIT(A) SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS ANY ORDER AS HE MAY DEEM FIT IN THE MATTER. 5 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS / 12 /201 7 . (N. S. SAINI) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CUTTACK ; DATED / 12 /201 7 . . / PKM , SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : / BY ORDER, ( SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ) , / ITAT, CUTTACK 1. APPELLANT - 2. / THE RESPONDENT - ITO , WARD - 4 ( 2 ), BHUBANESWAR 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A), 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, CUTTACK 6. / GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//