Smt. Indra Sharma, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 6743/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 674320114 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 2
• Next Hearing Date: 14-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 12-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ KUMAR CHOPRA
• Section: 80C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : SMC NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI J.SUDHAKAR REDDY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO: 6743/DEL/2014 ASSTT. YEARS : - 2010-11 INDRA SHARMA ITO 155, TELEWARA, WARD-39(1) SADAR BAZAR NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. (PAN ABAPS1474K) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI VED JAIN, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY :SHRI MANOJ KUMAR CHOPRA, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING :14.7.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 1 5.7. 2015 O R D E R PER J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE DIR ECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 17.10.2 014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS :- 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 24,000/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF PROFESSIONAL CHARGES TO VP & CO. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEA RNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 48,000/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF PROFESSIONAL CHARGES TO V.P. & SONS HUF 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEA RNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO IN NOT ALLOWING DEDUCTIN OF RS. 1,00,000 UNDER SECTION 80IC. ITA NO. 6743/DEL/2014 INDRA SHA RMA VS. ITO 2 2. WE HAVE HEARD SHRI MANOJ KUMAR CHOPRA, S R. DR ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE AND SHRI VED JAIN ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. ON A CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE FACTS A ND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND A PERUSAL OF THE PAPERS ON RECORD AND THE ORDERS OF T HE AUTHORITIES BELOW WE HOLD AS FOLLOWS :- 4. THE FIRST ISSUE IS THE DEDUCTION CLAIMED B Y THE ASSESSEE U/S 80C OF THE ACT FOR RS. 1/- LAC. THE PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE BY THE HUF OF THE ASSESSEE. LD. CIT(A) WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE DEDUCTION CANNOT BE ALLOWE D SINCE, THE PAYMENT HAS NOT BEEN MADE, IN THE SPECIFIED DEPOSITS, FROM THE TOTA L INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ALSO FELT THAT THE DOUBLE CLAIM MAY BE MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE HUF IN SUCH CASES. 5. IN OUR VIEW, THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE ORDE R OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, FOR THE REASON THAT SECTION 80C HAS BEEN INTRODUCED W.E .F. 1.4.2006 AND BEFORE THAT DATE, A REBATE WAS ALLOWED U/S 88 ON SPECIFIED INVE STMENT. THE CONDITION THAT THE AMOUNT SHALL BE PAID OUT OF THE TOTAL INCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE, WAS OMITTED BY THE FINANCE ACT 2002 W.E.F. 1.4.2003. HENCE THE GROUND OF REJECTING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESEE CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. SECONDLY, IF THE H UF CLAIMS THE SAME AMOUNT THEN THE AO CAN ALWAYS TAKE SUITABLE ACTION AND SUCH SUS PICION CANNOT BE A GROUND FOR DENIAL OF THE EXEMPTION CLAIMED. ITA NO. 6743/DEL/2014 INDRA SHA RMA VS. ITO 3 6. THE SECOND ISSUE IS THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 48,000/-, BEING AMOUNT PAID BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE HUF M/S. V.P. & SONS. THE HUF A DMITTED THIS INCOME AND PAID TAX. THERE IS NO ELEMENT OF TAX SAVING AS THE HUF A LSO PAYS TAX AT A HIGHER RATE. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE DISALLOWANCE IN QUES TION IS DELETED. 7. THE THIRD ISSUE IS THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS . 24,000/- PAID BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE HUF ON ACCOUNT OF PROFESSIONAL CHARGES. AS REN DERING OF SERVICE IS NOT PROVED, IN OUR VIEW THE DISALLOWANCE HAS BEEN RIGHTLY MADE. IN THE RESULT THIS DISALLOWANCE OF RS . 24,000/- IS UPHELD. HENCE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED IN PART. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15 TH JULY, 2015. SD/- (J. SUDHAKAR REDDY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: THE 15 TH JULY, 2015 VEENA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY. REGISTRAR SL. NO. DESCRIPTION DATE 1. DATE OF DICTATION BY THE AUTHOR 14.7.2015 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 15.7.2 015 3. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER ITA NO. 6743/DEL/2014 INDRA SHA RMA VS. ITO 4 4. DRAFT APPROVED BY THE SECOND MEMBER 5. DATE OF APPROVED ORDER COMES TO THE SR. PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER 7. DATE OF FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER