Mr. V. Vidyasagar, Bangalore V. ITO, Bangalore

ITA 647/BANG/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0303 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 16-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUNIL KUMAR AGARWALA J
• Assessee Lawyers: K Y NINGOJI RAO
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure
• Section: 143(3); 234B; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE S MT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 647/ BANG/20 14 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008 - 09 ) SHRI V.VIDYASAGAR, PARVATHAMMA BUILDING VIDYARANYAPURA POST, BANGALORE - 560097. APPELLANT PA NO.ABRPV 2754 L VS. INCOME - TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(4), BANGALORE. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI K.Y.NINGOJI RAO, CA. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUNIL KUMAR AGARWALA,JCIT(DR) DATE OF HEARING : 16/06/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24 /06/2016 O R D E R PER I NTURI RAMA RAO, AM : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - II, BANGALORE, DATED 10/03/2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09. 2. THE ASSESSEE RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF ASSESSMENT IS LIABLE TO SET ASIDE IN SO FAR AS IT IS INCORRECT, IMPROPER, IRREGULAR, OPPOSED TO FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND OPPOSED TO THE LAW. ITA NO . 647/ BANG/201 4 PAGE 2 OF 4 2. THE LEARNED COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 24,00,000/ - MADE BY THE RESPONDENT ASSESSING OFFICER TOWARDS PROVISION MADE BY THE APPELLANT IN HIS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT UNDER THE HEAD LIQUIDATED DAMAGES FOR THE A.Y.2008 - 09 WITHOUT AP PRECIATING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 3. THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE AFORESAID DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 24,00,000/ - ON THE GROUND THAT THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER IS TOTALLY SILENT AS TO HOW THE DISALLOWANCE WAS MADE AND THE A C FAILED TO COME UP WITH A REMAND REPORT, WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 4. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF RS.4,32,450/ - MADE BY THE RESPONDENT ASSESSING OFFICER BY TREATING THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME DECLARED BY THE APPELLANT AS NON - AGRICULTURAL INCOME FOR THE A.Y.2008 - 09 WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 5. THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE AFORESAID ADDITION OF RS. 4,32,450/ - ON THE SOLE GROUND THAT THE APPELLANT HAS NOT RAISED ANY GROUND OF APPEAL, WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND THE EVIDENCES AND EXPLANATIONS ADDUCED BY THE APPELLANT. 6. THAT THE IMPUGNED LEVY OF INTEREST OF RS.25,176/ - U/S 234A IS LIA BLE TO SET ASIDE IN SO FAR AS THE APPELLANT IS NOT LIABLE THERE FOR. 7. THAT THE IMPUGNED LEVY O F INTEREST OF RS.2,07,702/ - U/S 234B IS LIABLE TO SET ASIDE IN SO FAR AS THE APPELLANT IS NOT LIABLE THERE FOR. ITA NO . 647/ BANG/201 4 PAGE 3 OF 4 3. BRIEFLY, FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESS EE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND IS IN THE BUSINESS OF DEVELOPMENT OF LAYOUTS. RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09 WAS FILED ON 14/11/2008 DISCLOSING AN INCOME OF RS.1,98,760/ - . AGAINST THE SAID RETURN OF INCOME, ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED BY THE ASSES SING OFFICER (AO) U/S 143(3) VIDE ORDER DATED 06/12/2010 AT A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.32,97,970/ - . WHILE DOING SO, THE AO HAD DISALLOWED LIQUIDATED DAMAGES OF RS.24 LAKHS DEBITED TO PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT, DISBELIEVING AGRICULTURAL INCOME MADE ADDITION OF RS. 4,32,450/ - AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. ADDITION OF RS.2,66,759/ - WAS ALSO MADE UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE ON CREDIT CARD TRANSACTIONS. THE AO OBSERVED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD N EITHER COMPLIED WITH ANY NOTICE ISSUED U/S 143(2) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'THE ACT' FOR SHORT] NOR FILED ANY DETAILS IN SUPPORT OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY HIM. THOUGH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS STATED TO HAVE BEEN UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC TION 1 43(3), IT WAS AN EX - PARTE ASS ESSMENT ORDER U/S 144 OF THE ACT. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THIS ASSESSMENT ORDER, AN APPEAL WAS PREFERRED BEFORE THE CIT(A) WHO VIDE IMPUGNED ORDER CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS EXCEPT IN RESPECT OF ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF TRANSACTIONS OF CREDIT CARD OF RS.2,66 ,759/ - . BEING AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US IN THE PRESENT APPEAL. ITA NO . 647/ BANG/201 4 PAGE 4 OF 4 5. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSING MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT ADMITTEDLY DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT CO - OPER ATED WITH THE AO BY FILING NECESSARY INFORMATION/EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF RETURN OF INCOME. NOTICE U/S 142 OF THE ACT HAS GONE UN - RESPONDED. FOR ADJUDICATION OF GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE US, IT REQUIRES VERIFICATION OF EVIDENCE AND MATERIAL AND THEREFORE, I N OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, IT IS A FIT CASE TO BE SENT BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR DE NOVO ASSESSMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER AFFORDING DUE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS PARTLY AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24 TH JUNE, 2016 S D/ - S D/ - (SMT.ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE : BANGALORE D A T E D : 24 /0 6 /2016 SRINIVASULU, SP S COPY TO : 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT(A) - II BANGALORE 4 CIT 5 DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSIST ANT REGISTRAR INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE