M/s M.P.Matsya Mahasangh Maryadit, Bhopal V. THE ACIT, Bhopal

ITA 676/IND/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 82662 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 14-11-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE P.K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.676/IND/2013 A.Y.2008-09 M.P. MATSYA MAHASANGH MARYADIT, BHADBHADA FISH FARM, BHADBHADA ROAD BHOPAL. PAN:AAAAM 0348J VS. ACIT-2(1) BHOPAL. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA, SR.D.R. ASSESSEE(S) BY : NONE /DATE OF HEARING : 09/09/2014 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 12/09/2014 / O R D E R PER SHRI MUKUL KUMAR SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER THE APPELLANT HAS MOVED AN APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNM ENT, HOWEVER CONSIDERING THE SMALLNESS OF THE ISSUE INVOLVED, TH E SAME IS REJECTED. THE GROUND RAISED BEFORE US WHICH HAS EMERGED FROM CIT( A)-I BHOPAL ORDER DATED 05.09.2013 IS AS UNDER: 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY FINDING AS TO WHICH EXPENSES ARE NOT WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS OF ADHOC DISALLOWANCE OF RS.3,17,153/- FROM VEHICLE EXPENSES OF ADMINISTRATIVE AND BRANCHES IS NOT JUSTIFIED HENCE BE DELETED. 2. THIS IS A CASE OF A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY STATED TO BE IN THE BUSINESS OF SALE OF FISH AND ALSO IN FISH SEED PRODUCTION AS MENTIONED BY THE A.O. VIDE AN ORDER U/S.143(3) DATED 14.09.2009. THE ASSE SSEE HAD CLAIMED AN EXPENDITURE OF RS.31,71,525/- FOR VEHICLE R/M EXPE NSES. THE ASSESSEE ITA NO.676/IND/2013 M.P. MATSYA MAHASANGH MARYADIT VS. ACIT-2(1) BHOPAL A.Y.2008-09 - 2 - WAS ASKED TO PRODUCE THE LOG BOOK OF THE VEHICLE. O N PERUSAL OF THE LOG BOOK, IT WAS NOTED BY THE A.O. THAT THE VEHICLES WE RE NOT EXCLUSIVELY USED FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE BUSINESS, THEREFORE, HE HAD MADE AN ADHOC 30% DISALLOWANCE OF RS.9,51,457/-. 3. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CARRIED BEFORE THE FIRST APP ELLATE AUTHORITY THE DISALLOWANCE WAS RESTRICTED TO 10% OF THE TOTAL EXPENDITURE AT RS.3,17,153/-. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS FURTHER IN APPEA L. 4. FROM THE SIDE OF THE REVENUE, LEARNED SR.D.R., M R. R.A. VERMA HAS STATED THAT A REASONABLE RELIEF HAS ALREADY BEE N GRANTED BY LEARNED CIT(A), THEREFORE, NO FURTHER RELIEF SHOULD BE GIVE N TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. AS IS EVIDENT FROM THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW THIS IS A CASE WHERE AN ADHOC DISALLOWANCE WAS MADE BY THE A.O. AS WELL AS BY LEARNED CIT(A). THE A.O. HAS NOT PLACED ON RECORD ANY SPECI FIC INSTANCE WHEN THOSE VEHICLES HAVE NOT BEEN USED FOR THE PURPOSE O F THE BUSINESS. RATHER, LEARNED CIT(A) HAS MENTIONED THAT A SUM OF RS.250 P ER MONTH WAS RECOVERED FROM THREE PERSONS BY THE ASSESSEE TOWARD S PERSONAL USE OF THE VEHICLES. ACCORDING TO LEARNED CIT(A), THE AMOUNT W HICH WAS RECOVERED HAPPENED TO BE VERY NOMINAL; HENCE, AN ESTIMATED DI SALLOWANCE OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN MADE. CONSIDERING ALL THOSE FACTS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT AN ESTIMATED DISALLOWANCE DOES NOT SURVIVE, ESPECIALLY , WHEN A LOG BOOK HAS BEEN MAINTAINED AS HELD IN THE CASE OF SAYAJI I RON AND ENGINEERING CO. VS. CIT, 253 ITR 749 (GUJARAT). PLACING RELIANC E ON THIS PRECEDENT, WE HEREBY ALLOW THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO.676/IND/2013 M.P. MATSYA MAHASANGH MARYADIT VS. ACIT-2(1) BHOPAL A.Y.2008-09 - 3 - 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. SD/- SD/- (P.K. BANSAL) (MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER INDORE; DATED 12/09/2014 PRABHAT KR. KESARWANI, SR. P.S. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ! / THE APPELLANT 2. '# ! / THE RESPONDENT. 3. $%$&' # # ( / CONCERNED CIT 4. # # ( ( ) / THE CIT(A), INDORE 5. +,# &' , # # &' , ./% / DR, ITAT, INDORE 6. ,01 2 / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, 3 33 3/ // /.# $4 .# $4 .# $4 .# $4 ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) ITAT, INDORE