Abdul Rehman, Sitapur V. Income Tax Officer, Sitapur

ITA 625/LKW/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 92214 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 10-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 28-07-2014
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PUNEET KUMAR
• Keywords: Business income

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.625/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2009 - 2010 INCOME TAX OFFICER, SITAPUR. VS SHRI ABDUL RAHMAN, PROP. M/S ABDUL REHMAN SAEED REHMAN, BHARGAVA MARKET, SITAPUR. PAN: AHEPR1468C (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) SHRI K. R. RASTOGI, F.C.A. APPELLANT BY SHRI PUNEET KUMAR, D. R. RESPONDENT BY 1 0 /0 6 /2015 DATE OF HEARING 15 /0 7 /2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A), BAREILLY DATED 09 / 05 /2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 2010. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER: THAT THE LEARNED COURTS BELOW ARE NOT JUSTIFIED IN NOT ACCEPTING THE INCOME AS SHOWN IN THE INCOME TAX RETURN. THAT THE LEARNED COURTS BELOW ARE NOT JUSTIFIED IN ADDING RS.40,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INCOME. THAT THE LEARNED COURTS BELOW ARE NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.30,100/ - ON ACCOUNT OF LOW WITHDRAWAL, AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THAT THE LEARNED COURTS BELOW ARE NOT JUSTIFIED IN ADDING RS.30,000/ - OUT OF FEW EXPENSES 2 THAT THE LEARNED COURTS BELOW ARE NOT JUSTIFIED IN CHARGING INTEREST. THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER TAX IS BAD IN LAW. THAT THE FINDINGS OF THE LEARNED COURTS BELOW ARE CONTRARY TO LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE. 3. REGARDING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF RS.40,000/ - , IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THIS ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE TWICE, WHICH IS NOT JUSTIFIED. REGARDING THE SECOND ADDITION OF RS.30,100/ - ON ACCOUNT OF LOW WITHDRAWAL, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THIS IS EXCESSIVE. 4. LEARNED D. R. OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIND THAT AS PER COMPUTATION OF INCOME AVAILABLE ON RECORD, IT IS SEEN THAT AN AMOUNT OF RS.40,000/ - WAS ADDED AS INCOME UNDER TH E HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES U NDER THE HEADING MISC. RECEIPTS. AS PER THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, IT IS NOTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT AS PER CAPITAL ACCOUNT, RS.20,000/ - WAS ADDED TO CAPITAL ON 30/03/2009 AND FURTHER AMOUNT OF RS.20,000/ - WAS ADDED AS CAPITAL ON 30/03/2009 AND HE ADDED TOTAL BOTH THESE AMOUNTS I.E RS. 40,000/ - BUT WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY ADDED THIS TOTAL AMOUNT OF RS.40,000/ - IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME OVER AND ABOVE THE BUSINESS INCOME AS PER PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT OF RS.2,84,5 69.56, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT JUSTIFIED. HENCE, WE DELETE THE SAME. 6. REGARDING THE SECOND ISSUE I.E. REGARDING ADDITION OF RS.30,100/ - ON ACCOUNT OF LOW HOUSE HOLD WITHDRAWALS, IT IS NOTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER 3 IN THE ASSE SSMENT ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE WITHDRAWAL OF RS.55,900/ - . THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ESTIMATED THE HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES OF THE ASSESSEE @RS.8,000/ - PER MONTH I.E. RS.96,000/ - PER ANNUM AND MADE THE ADDITION OF BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.30,100/ - . LEARNE D CIT(A) HAS GIVEN A CATEGORICAL FINDING IN HIS ORDER THAT IN COURSE OF APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT MADE OUT A CASE THAT THE WITHDRAWAL OF RS.65,900/ - WAS REASONABLE AS HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES. BEFORE US ALSO, IT COULD NOT BE SHOWN THAT THE HOUSE HOLD EXPENS ES ESTIMATED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT RS.96,000/ - IS EXCESSIVE. THEREFORE, ON THIS ISSUE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A). 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED PARTLY. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN TH E OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 15 /0 7 /2015 *C.L.SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1.THE APPELLANT 2.THE RESPONDENT. 3.CONCERNED CIT 4.THE CIT(A) 5.D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTRAR