Ranjitbhai Balvantrai Dod, V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), RAJKOT-GUJARAT

ITA 436/RJT/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1264 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 13-11-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C S ANJARIA
• Assessee Lawyers: DM RINDANI
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Gift
• Section: 143(3); 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH , RAJKOT BEFORE: SHR I S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [CONDUCTED THROU GH E - COURT AT AHMEDABAD] RANJITBHAI BALVANTRAI DOD, POST AT: KHAREDA, TAL. KOTDA SANGANI, DIST. RAJKOT PAN: AKYPD3648M (APPELLANT) VS THE ITO, WARD. 1(3), RAJKOT (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : S H RI C.S. ANJARIA , SR. D . R. ASSESSEE BY: S H RI D.M. RINDANI , A.R. DATE OF HEARING : 30 - 05 - 2 016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08 - 06 - 2 016 / ORDER P ER : S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER : - THI S ASSESSEE S APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2009 - 10 , AR ISES FROM ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - I, RAJKOT DATED 01 - 10 - 2013 IN APPEAL NO. CIT(A) - I / RJT/0148/11 - 12 , IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT . I T A NO . 436 / RJT /20 13 A SSESSMENT YEAR 200 9 - 10 I.T.A NO. 436 /RJT /20 13 A.Y. 2009 - 10 PAGE NO RANJITBHAI BALVANTRAI DOD VS. ITO 2 2. THE ASSESSEE RAISES TWO SUBSTANTIVE GROUNDS INTER ALIA CHALLENGING SECTION 68 ADDITION OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT OF RS. 4 LACS AND DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSE S OF RS. 75,000/ - , MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN HIS ORDER DATED 27 - 12 - 20 11 AND AFFIRMED IN THE LOWER APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. 3. WE COME TO FORMER GROUND FIRST. THIS ASSESSEE IS A LABOUR CONTRACTOR. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED HIM TO HAVE INTRODUCED NEW CAPITAL OF RS. 4 LACS IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE ASSESSEE AT TRIBUTED SOURCE THEREOF TO HIS PARENTS AGRICULTURAL INCOME FROM LANDS SITUATED IN VILLAGE KHAREDA. WE FIND THAT HE ALSO FOUGHT TO PLACE ON RECORD THE RELE V ANT REVENUE RECORD FOR PROVING OWNERSHIP OF THE RELEVANT AGRICULTURAL LAND. THE ASSESSING OFFICER APPEARS TO HAVE WAI T ED SUFFICIENTLY BEFORE MAKING THE IMPUGNED ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEE S FAILURE IN PLACING ON RECORD THE REVENUE DOCUMENTS. WE COME TO LATTER ADDITION. THE ASSESSEE HAD DEBITED DIFFERENT TYPES OF LABOUR CHARGES AMOUNTING TO RS . 2,52,20,158/ - . HE PRODUCED ON RECORD THE RELEVANT BOOKS WITH BILLS AND VOUCHERS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THESE VOUCHERS BASED EXPENSES WERE DEFECTIVE SINCE NAMES OF ALL THE PAYEES ALONG WITH ADDRESSES AND NATURE OF EXPENDITURE WERE NOT LEGIBLE. WE WENT ON TO DISALLOW A LUMP SUM AMOUNT OF RS. 75,000/ - FORMING SUBJECT MATTER OF THE LATTER GROUND . I.T.A NO. 436 /RJT /20 13 A.Y. 2009 - 10 PAGE NO RANJITBHAI BALVANTRAI DOD VS. ITO 3 4. T HE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL. THE CIT(A) AFFIRMS ASSESSING OFFICER S FINDINGS ON BOTH COUNTS. THIS LEAVES THE ASSESSEE AGGRIEVED. 5 . WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES WHO REITERATE THEIR RESPECTIVE STANDS. CASE FILE PERUSED. THERE IS NO DISPUTE QUA THE FIRST ADDITION THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PLACE ON RECORD THE RELEVANT REVENUE R ECORD TO PROVE OWNERSHIP TO AGRICULTURAL LAND IN HIS PA RENTS NAME. HE COULD ONLY FILE AFFIDAVIT OF HIS PARENTS IN SUPPORT OF GIFT CLAIM. WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT IT IS NECESSARY FOR THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THAT HIS PARENTS IN FACT OWNED AGRICULTURAL LANDS TO E XPLAIN SOURCE OF THE GIFT SUMS. LEARNED A UTHORIZ E D R EPRESENTATIVE SEEKS ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO PLACE ON RECORD THE RELEVANT REVENUE RECORD. SHRI ANJARIA (SR. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE) REPRESENTING THE REVENUE STRONGLY OPPOSES THIS PLEA . WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ONLY ONUS ON ASSESSEE S PART I S TO PROVE AGRICULTURAL LAND OWNERSHIP AT HIS PARENTS B E HEST. WE ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE THIS ISSUE IN THE LARGER INTEREST OF JUSTICE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR ADJUDICATION AFRESH. IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT ASSESSEE WOULD BE GRANTED THREE EFFECT IVE OPPORTUNITIES IN CONSEQUENTIAL PROCEEDINGS . THIS FIRST SUBSTANTIVE GROUND IS ACCEPTED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. WE COME TO LATTER SUBSTAN T I VE GROUND CHALLENGING LABOUR EXPENSES DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 75,000/ - OUT OF RS. 2,52,20,158/ - AS MADE BY BOT H THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ON ACCOUNT OF CERTAIN DEFECTS FOUND IN THE RELEVANT VOUCHERS . SHRI RINDANI SEEKS TO RESTORE THIS I.T.A NO. 436 /RJT /20 13 A.Y. 2009 - 10 PAGE NO RANJITBHAI BALVANTRAI DOD VS. ITO 4 ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER SO AS TO LEAD FRESH EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE CLAIM. WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT BOTH THE L OWER AUTHORITIES HAVE ALREADY GRANTED SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE QUA THIS ISSUE INVOLVING A MINUSCULE SUM OF LABOUR EXPENDITURE DISALLOWANCE. WE REJECT ASSESSEE S CONTENTIONS WITH A CLARIFICATION THAT OUR ORDER SHALL NOT FORM PRECEDENT IN AN Y PRECEDING OR SUCCEEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR ON THIS ISSUE. THIS SECOND SUBSTANTIVE GROUND FAILS 7. THIS ASSESSEE S APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OUR T ON 08 - 06 - 201 6 SD/ - SD/ - (MANISH BORAD ) ( S. S. GODARA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 08 /06 /2016 AK / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT