Kirti Bhushan Bhatia, Muzaffarnagar V. ITO, Muzaffarnagar

ITA 5534/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 553420114 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-06-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 27-06-2012
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 09-12-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R S NEGI
• Section: 40A(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI DELHI DELHI BENCH BENCH BENCH BENCH D DD D : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G. BEFORE SHRI G. BEFORE SHRI G. BEFORE SHRI G.D.AGRAWAL, D.AGRAWAL, D.AGRAWAL, D.AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SHRI SHRI SHRI I.C.SUDHIR I.C.SUDHIR I.C.SUDHIR I.C.SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER , JUDICIAL MEMBER , JUDICIAL MEMBER , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. ITA NO. ITA NO. ITA NO.5534 5534 5534 5534/DEL/201 /DEL/201 /DEL/201 /DEL/2011 11 1 ASSESSMENT YEAR ASSESSMENT YEAR ASSESSMENT YEAR ASSESSMENT YEAR : : : : 200 200 200 2008 88 8- -- -09 0909 09 SHRI KIRTI BHUSHAN BHATIA, SHRI KIRTI BHUSHAN BHATIA, SHRI KIRTI BHUSHAN BHATIA, SHRI KIRTI BHUSHAN BHATIA, PROP. MARUTI ROAD CARRIER, PROP. MARUTI ROAD CARRIER, PROP. MARUTI ROAD CARRIER, PROP. MARUTI ROAD CARRIER, 47 4747 47- -- -C, C, C, C, NEW MANDI, NEW MANDI, NEW MANDI, NEW MANDI, MUZAFFARNAGAR. MUZAFFARNAGAR. MUZAFFARNAGAR. MUZAFFARNAGAR. PAN : ADDPB7529D. PAN : ADDPB7529D. PAN : ADDPB7529D. PAN : ADDPB7529D. VS. VS. VS. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD WARD WARD WARD- -- -1(2), 1(2), 1(2), 1(2), MUZAFFARNAGAR. MUZAFFARNAGAR. MUZAFFARNAGAR. MUZAFFARNAGAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI M.P.RASTOGI, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R.S.NEGI, SR.DR. ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER G. PER G. PER G. PER G.D.AGRAWAL, D.AGRAWAL, D.AGRAWAL, D.AGRAWAL, VP VPVP VP : : : : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A), MUZAFFARNAGAR DATED 11 TH AUGUST, 2011. 2. GROUND NO.1 OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL READS AS UN DER:- THAT THE DISALLOWANCE/ADDITION OF RS.2,08,320/-, B EING THE AMOUNT PAID TO TRUCK DRIVER ON BEHALF OF TRIVENI ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LTD., U/S 40A(3) OF THE INCO ME-TAX ACT, 1961 BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES IS ARBITRARY, UN JUST AND BAD IN LAW. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, IT WAS POINTED OUT BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL THAT THE LEGISLATURE HAS INTRODUCED SECOND PROVISO TO SECTION 40A(3) BY THE FINANCE (NO.2) ACT, 2009. AS PER THIS PROVISO, THE MONETARY LIMIT UNDER SECTION 40A(3) HAS BEEN EN HANCED TO ITA-5534/DEL/2011 2 ` 35,000/- FROM ` 20,000/-. HE STATED THAT THIS PROVISO IS A CLARIFI CATORY PROVISO WHICH HAS BEEN INTRODUCED TO MITIGATE THE D IFFICULTIES BEING FACED BY THE ASSESSEES IN RESPECT OF PAYMENT OF TRU CK HIRE CHARGES. THAT THE PAYMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IS FOR TRUCK HIRE CHARGES AND EACH PAYMENT IS BELOW ` 35,000/-. THAT SINCE THE PROVISO IS CLARIFICATORY OR REMEDIAL IN NATURE, IT WILL HAVE R ETROSPECTIVE OPERATION. IN SUPPORT OF THIS CONTENTION, HE RELIED UPON THE F OLLOWING DECISIONS:- (I) ALLIED MOTORS (P) LTD. VS. CIT 224 ITR 677 (SC). (II) CIT VS. ALOM EXTRUSIONS LTD. 319 ITR 306 (SC). 4. THE LEARNED DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, STATED THAT T HE FACTS OF BOTH THE CASES RELIED UPON BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL ARE AL TOGETHER DIFFERENT. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE MONETARY LIMIT IN EVERY SECTI ON IS BEING MODIFIED BY THE LEGISLATURE FROM TIME TO TIME KEEPI NG IN VIEW THE INFLATION. THAT ENHANCEMENT OF MONETARY LIMIT IS N EVER CONSIDERED AS RETROSPECTIVE. HE ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THIS PROVI SO IS INTRODUCED BY THE FINANCE (NO.2) ACT, 2009 W.E.F. 1.10.2009. THU S, A SPECIFIC DATE IS GIVEN BY THE LEGISLATURE FOR THE APPLICABILITY OF T HIS PROVISO, THEREFORE, THE CONTENTION OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL THAT THIS PRO VISO WOULD BE APPLICABLE RETROSPECTIVELY WILL NOT HOLD GOOD. 5. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ARGUMENTS OF BO TH THE SIDES AND HAVE PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. AF TER CONSIDERING THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND THE FACTS OF THE CA SE, WE ENTIRELY AGREE WITH THE CONTENTION OF THE LEARNED DR. THE S ECOND PROVISO AFTER SECTION 40A(3) HAS BEEN INSERTED BY THE FINANCE (NO .2) ACT, 2009 W.E.F. 1.10.2009. THUS, THE MONETARY LIMIT OF ` 20,000/- HAS BEEN INCREASED TO ` 35,000/- WITH A PARTICULAR DATE IN RESPECT OF HIRE CHARGES. IN OUR OPINION, THE MONETARY LIMITS OF VARIOUS SECT IONS ARE REVISED UPWARD BY THE LEGISLATURE FROM TIME TO TIME CONSIDE RING THE EROSION IN THE VALUE OF THE RUPEE OVER A PERIOD OF TIME. HOWE VER, MERELY ITA-5534/DEL/2011 3 BECAUSE SUBSEQUENTLY THE MONETARY LIMIT IS INCREASE D, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE ENHANCED MONETARY LIMIT WOULD BE APPL ICABLE FROM A RETROSPECTIVE PERIOD. THE FACTS OF BOTH THE CASES RELIED UPON BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL ARE ALTOGETHER DIFFERENT. THEREFOR E, THE SAME WOULD NOT BE APPLICABLE IN RESPECT OF UPWARD REVISION OF THE MONETARY LIMIT. WE, THEREFORE, REJECT GROUND NO.1 OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL. 6. GROUND NO.2 OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL READS AS UN DER:- THAT THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.20,000/- AS SUSTAINED BY THE CIT(APPEALS) OUT OF VARIOUS EXPENSES IS ARBITRARY, UNJUST AND AT ANY RATE VERY EXCESSIVE. 7. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT OUT OF VARIOUS EX PENSES, NAMELY, TRAVELING, TELEPHONE, STAFF WELFARE, OFFICE RENT, S ALARY AND WAGES ETC., THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED A SUM OF ` 40,000/- BECAUSE THE EXPENSES ARE NOT FULLY VOUCHED AND VERIFIABLE. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ALREADY REDUCED THE SAME TO ` 20,000/-. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICATION TO INTERFERE WITH THE OR DER OF LEARNED CIT(A) IN THIS REGARD. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO.2 OF THE ASSES SEES APPEAL IS REJECTED. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSE D. DECISION PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 TH JUNE, 2012. SD/- SD/- ( (( (I.C.SUDHIR I.C.SUDHIR I.C.SUDHIR I.C.SUDHIR) )) ) (G.D.AGRAWAL) (G.D.AGRAWAL) (G.D.AGRAWAL) (G.D.AGRAWAL) JUDICIAL JUDICIAL JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT DATED : 28.06.2012 VK. ITA-5534/DEL/2011 4 COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT : SHRI KIRTI BHUSHAN BHATIA, SHRI KIRTI BHUSHAN BHATIA, SHRI KIRTI BHUSHAN BHATIA, SHRI KIRTI BHUSHAN BHATIA, PROP. MARUTI ROAD CARRIER, PROP. MARUTI ROAD CARRIER, PROP. MARUTI ROAD CARRIER, PROP. MARUTI ROAD CARRIER, 47 4747 47- -- -C, NEW MANDI, C, NEW MANDI, C, NEW MANDI, C, NEW MANDI, MUZAFFARNAGAR. MUZAFFARNAGAR. MUZAFFARNAGAR. MUZAFFARNAGAR. 2. RESPONDENT : INCOME TA INCOME TA INCOME TA INCOME TAX OFFICER, X OFFICER, X OFFICER, X OFFICER, WARD WARD WARD WARD- -- -1(2), 1(2), 1(2), 1(2), MUZAFFARNAGAR. MUZAFFARNAGAR. MUZAFFARNAGAR. MUZAFFARNAGAR. 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR