RAHUL AUTOMOBILES, Burdwan V. ITO, Ward-1(3), Durgapur, Durgapur

ITA 617/KOL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 61723514 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 18-04-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R K SAHA
• Assessee Lawyers: UDYAN DASGUPTA

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO.:617/ KOL. / 2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA SMC BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER), I.T.A. NO.: 617/ KOL. / 2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 RAHUL AUTOMOBILES. ...APPELLANT ANDAL MORE, P.O. ANDAL, DIST. BURDWAN-713 321, W.B. [PAN :AAGFR 1369 D] -VS.- INCOME TAX OFFICER.....RESPONDENT, WARD-1(3), DURGAPUR APPEARANCES BY: SHRI UDYAN DASGUPTA, FOR THE APPELLANT SHRI R.K. SAHA, D.R., FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : JUNE 04, 2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : JUNE 04, 2012 O R D E R 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE-APPELLANT HA S CALLED INTO QUESTION CORRECTNESS OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)S ORDER DATED 24 TH JANUARY, 2012, IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT U/S. 14 3(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND :- FOR THAT ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) W AS NOT JUSTIFIED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS.1,60,000 /- U/S. 40A(3), WHEN THE SAID CASH PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE ON 15 TH OF AUGUST, 2007 (A NATIONAL HOLIDAY) AND THE SAME I S I.T.A. NO.:617/ KOL. / 2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 PAGE 2 OF 3 COVERED BY THE EXCEPTIONS UNDER RULE 6DD(A)(K) OF T HE I. TAX RULES, 1962. 2. THE APPEAL IS TIME BARRED BY FIVE DAYS, BUT THE ASSESEE HAS MOVED A PETITION SEEKING CONDONATION OF DELAY. HAVING PER USED THE PETITION, AND HAVING HEARD THE PARTIES, I AM SATISFIED THAT D ELAY IS CAUSED BY POSTAL AUTHORITIES AND DESERVES TO BE CONDONED. I, THEREFORE, CONDONE THE DELAY AND TAKE UP THE APPEAL FOR DISPOSAL ON ME RITS. 3. THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE PAYMENT OF RS.1,60, 000/- WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN LIEU OF CHEQUE RETURNED UNPAID. THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION WAS THAT THE SAID SUM WAS DEMANDED ON AN D PAID ON 15.08.2007 WHICH WAS A NATIONAL HOLIDAY AND THE ASS ESSEE COULD NOT HAVE DELAYED IN DUE TO SERIOUS REPERCUSSION OF A BO UNCED CHEQUE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS REJECTED THIS EXPLANATION ON THE GROUND THAT AMOUNT WAS SHOWN IN THE LEDGER OF THE RECIPIENT ON 16.08.2007, AND NOT 15.08.2007. THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS CONFIRMED THE SAID ACTION. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE ME. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE AS A LSO THE APPLICABLE LEGAL POSITION. 5. IN MY CONSIDERED VIEW, THE SITUATION IS CLEARLY COVERED BY RULE 6DD(J) AS THE PAYMENT WAS MADE ON A NATIONAL HOLIDA Y ON WHICH BANKS WERE CLOSED. MERELY BECAUSE ACCOUNTING ENTRY IS EFF ECTED BY THE RECIPIENT ON A LATER DAY, IN MY CONSIDERED VIEW, CA NNOT AFFECT THE I.T.A. NO.:617/ KOL. / 2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 PAGE 3 OF 3 POSITION OF ASSESSEE. THE DISALLOWANCE, THEREFORE, MUST STAND DELETED. I ORDER SO. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31 ST DAY OF JULY, 2012. SD/- PRAMOD KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) KOLKATA, THE 31 ST DAY OF JULY, 2012 COPIES TO : (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ETC ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.