Karri Subba Reddy, Ravulapalem V. THE ITO, WARD - 2, Amalapuram

ITA 468/VIZ/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9748 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 28-07-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T SATYANANDAM
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

ITA NO.466 TO 468/VIZAG/2014 KARRI SUBBA REDDY, RAVULAPALEM 1 , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM SMC BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM . , BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./I.T.A.NO.466, 467 & 468/VIZAG/2014 ( / ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2005-06) KARRI SUBBA REDDY , RAVULAPALEM VS. ITO, WARD - 2, AMALAPURAM [PAN: AWEPK5839M ] ( / APPELLANT) ( ! / RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI G.V.N. HARI, AR / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI T. SATYANANDAM, DR / DATE OF HEARING : 2 9.8. 2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.10.2016 / O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THESE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED A GAINST ORDER OF THE CIT(A), VISAKHAPATNAM DATED 19.6.2014 FOR THE A SSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2005-06. 2. FACTS ARE IN BRIEF THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIV IDUAL ENGAGED IN TRANSPORT BUSINESS. DURING THE COURSE OF THE SURVE Y OPERATION, IN THE CASE OF MEDAPATI BHASKARA RAO, IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ITA NO.466 TO 468/VIZAG/2014 KARRI SUBBA REDDY, RAVULAPALEM 2 ALSO ENGAGED IN THE SAND BUSINESS ALONG WITH M. BHA SKARA RAO DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2006-07 & 2007-08. IT ALSO CAME TO LIGHT THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING TAXABLE INCOME FROM ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 ONWARDS. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ISSU ED A NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED AS 'TH E ACT') FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2005-06. IN RE SPONSE TO THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S 148 OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED RETURNS OF INCOME FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2005 -06 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF ` 60,000/-, ` 60,000/- & ` 72,000/- RESPECTIVELY. THE ASSESSEE ALSO DECLARED AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF ` 40,000/-, ` 45,000/- & ` 50,000/- RESPECTIVELY FOR THE SAID YEARS. THE A.O. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE, HE HAS ESTIMATED THE ASSESSEES INCOME FROM TRANSPORT BUSINESS AS PER SECTION 44AE OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 AT ` 69,600/-, FOR THE A.Y. 2004-05 AT ` 1,21,800/- AND FOR THE A.Y. 2005-06 AT ` 1,21,800/-. SO FAR AS AGRICULTURAL INCOME IS CONCERNED, THE A.O. HAS ESTI MATED INCOME FOR THE A.Y. 2003-04 AT ` 30,000/-, FOR THE A.Y. 2004-05 AT ` 30,000/- AND FOR THE A.Y. 2005-06 AT ` 30,000/- RESPECTIVELY. ACCORDINGLY, A.O. HAS COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT. ASSESSEE CARRIED MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). SO FAR AS ESTIMATION OF INCOME FROM TR ANSPORTATION BUSINESS ITA NO.466 TO 468/VIZAG/2014 KARRI SUBBA REDDY, RAVULAPALEM 3 IS CONCERNED, THE CIT(A), BY CONSIDERING ARGUMENTS OF THE ASSESSEE, HE HAS CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE A.O. BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ADMITTED INCOME FR OM ONE TRACTOR AND 2 LORRIES AND SUCH INCOME HAS BEEN RETURNED ON AN ESTIMATE BASIS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THE ASSESSEES CASE SQU ARELY FALLS WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF SECTION 44AE OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT. ACC ORDINGLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ESTIMATED THE INCOME FROM SUCH TR ANSPORT BUSINESS IN TERMS OF SECTION 44AE OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AND MADE THE IMPUGNED ADDITION OF RS.9,600/-, RS.61,800/- RS.49,800/- FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04; 2004-05 AND 2005-06 RESPECTIVELY. THE ASS ESSEE COULD NOT POINT OUT ANY REASON AS TO WHY THE PROVISIONS OF SE CTION 44AE WOULD NOT BE APPLICABLE IN HIS CASE. IN THESE FACTUAL SCENAR IO, I DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE PLEA RAISED. THEREFORE, THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS CONFIRMED. THESE GROUNDS OF A PPEAL ARE DISMISSED. 3. BEFORE ME, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBM ITTED THAT THE ESTIMATION MADE BY LD. CIT(A) IS ON HIGHER SIDE AND THE SAME MAY BE SCALED DOWN. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. D.R. HAS SUBMITTED TH AT ADDITION WAS MADE BY CONSIDERING SECTION 44AE OF THE ACT. 5. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE MATER IALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITI ES BELOW. I FIND THAT THE A.O., BY TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSEE S BUSINESS APPLIED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 44AE OF THE ACT. THE ASS ESSEE IS NOT ABLE TO POINT OUT ANY REASON THAT WHY SECTION 44AE OF THE A CT WOULD NOT BE APPLICABLE TO HIS CASE. I FIND NO REASON TO INTERF ERE WITH THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AND ACCORDINGLY THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS DIS MISSED. ITA NO.466 TO 468/VIZAG/2014 KARRI SUBBA REDDY, RAVULAPALEM 4 6. SO FAR AS ESTIMATION OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME IS C ONCERNED, THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE A.O. ON THE GROUN D THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT ABLE TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CASE IN RESPECT OF THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME DISCLOSED BY HIM. THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCLOSED AGRIC ULTURAL INCOME OF ` 40,000/-, A.O. HAS DETERMINED AT ` 30,000/- FOR THE A.Y. 2003-04; ASSESSEE HAS DISCLOSED ` 45,000/-, A.O. HAS DETERMINED AT ` 30,000/- FOR THE A.Y. 2004-05; AND ASSESSEE HAS DISCLOSED ` 50,000/-, A.O. HAS DETERMINED AT ` 30,000/- FOR THE A.Y. 2005-06. ACCORDINGLY, ASSES SMENT WAS COMPLETED. ON APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE AS SESSEE COULD NOT FURNISH ANY EVIDENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE THE AGRICULTUR AL INCOME RETURNED BY HIM. THEREFORE, THE CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE A.O. EVEN BEFORE ME, THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ABLE TO SUBSTANTIATE THE SOURCE OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME. UNDER THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMS TANCES OF THE CASE, I FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER PASSED B Y THE CIT(A). THUS, THESE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. THE ABOVE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27 TH OCT16. SD/- ( . ) (V. DURGA RAO) /JUDICIAL MEMBER ! /VISAKHAPATNAM: % /DATED : 27.10.2016 VG/SPS ITA NO.466 TO 468/VIZAG/2014 KARRI SUBBA REDDY, RAVULAPALEM 5 '! (! /COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / THE APPELLANT SRI KARRI SUBBA REDDY, S/O CHINA VENKATA REDDY, 1- 44, NEAR ANKALAMMA TEMPLE, UBALANKA ROAD, RAVULAPAL EM, E.G. DIST. 2. / THE RESPONDENT THE ITO WARD-2, AMALAPURAM 3. ) / THE CIT, VIJAYAWADA 4. ) / THE CIT(A), VIJAYAWADA 5. THE PRINCIPAL CIT-2, VISAKHAPATNAM 6. ! , , , , ! / DR, ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM 7 . / GUARD FILE / BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // /0 , (SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY) , , ! / ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM