SURESH CHAND GUPTA, Hindaun City V. ITO, Sawai Madhopur

ITA 677/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4940 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-11-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Next Hearing Date: 23-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 24-06-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: POONAM ROY DCIT DHK
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJIV SOGANI
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH HKKXPAN] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH DQY HKKJR ] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM & SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 677/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 SURESH CHAND GUPTA, PROP- M/S INDIA MOTORS ALONGWITH M/S STATE MOTORS, JAIPUR, HINDAUN CITY- 322230 CUKE VS. ITO, WARD-3, SAWAI MADHOPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: ABRPG 4753 G VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAJIV SOGANI (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SMT. POONAM ROY (DCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 09/04/2018 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10/04/2018 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: KUL BHARAT, J.M. THIS IS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE EMANATES F ROM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), AJMER DATED 16/02/2016 FOR THE 2005-05, WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE ID. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF ID. AO IN REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SEC TION 145(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 AND THEREAFTER MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS.3,38,654/- ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNRECONCILED DIFFERENCE IN THE ACCOUNT OF THE PARTIES FROM WHOM THE ASSESSE E HAS ITA 677/JP/2016_ SURESH CHAND GUPTA VS ITO 2 MADE PURCHASES DURING THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR. T HE ACTION OF THE ID. AO IS ILLEGAL, UNJUSTIFIED, ARBITRARY AN D AGAINST THE FACTS OF THE CASE. RELIEF MAY PLEASE BE GRANTED BY QUASHING THE REJECTION OF BOOKS, ACCEPTING THE BOOK RESULTS AND DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 3,38,654/-. 2. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW THE ID. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF ID. AO IN REJECTING THE CLAIM OF LOSS ON VEHICLE OF RS. 71,733/-, ON ACCOUN T OF SHORT AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM INSURANCE COMPANY AGAINST STOL EN VEHICLE. THE ACTION OF ID. CIT (A) IS ILLEGAL, UNJU STIFIED, ARBITRARY AND AGAINST THE FACTS OF THE CASE. RELIEF MAY PLEAS E BE GRANTED BY ALLOWING THE SAID LOSS OF RS. 71,733/-. 3. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW THE ID. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF ID. AO IN MAKING DISALLOWANCE OF THE BELOW MENTIONED EXPENSES: S. NO. PARTICULARS TOTAL AMOUNT AMOUNT DISALLOWED 1 DEPRECIATION ON VEHICLE 28,525 5,705 2 INSURANCE ON VEHICLE 9,719 1,944 3 REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE ON VEHICLE 13,920 2,784 4 SALARY EXPENSES 3,15,000 47,250 5 TELEPHONE EXPENSES 20,133 4,027 6 TRAVELLING EXPENSES 30,320 6,064 7 VEHICLE RUNNING EXPENSES 26,030 5,206 8 OFFICE, PACKING, POSTAGE AND PRINTING & STATIONARY EXPENSES 35,450 7,090 TOTAL 4,79,097/- 80,070 THE ACTION OF LD. CIT(A) IS ILLEGAL, UNJUSTIFIED, ARBITRARY AND AGAINST THE FACTS OF THE CASE. RELIEF MAY PLEASE BE GRANTED IN ALLOWING THE SAID EXPENSES OF RS. 80,070/-. 2. AT THE OUTSET OF HEARING, THE LD AR OF THE ASSES SEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT PROPER AND EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT HIS CASE ITA 677/JP/2016_ SURESH CHAND GUPTA VS ITO 3 WAS NOT AFFORDED BY THE LD. CIT(A) TO THE ASSESSEE, T HEREFORE, HE PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) MAY BE SET ASIDE AND THE APPEAL BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FO R A DECISION AFRESH. 3. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD. DR HAS OPPOSED THE SUBM ISSION OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTION OF BOTH THE P ARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. THE LD . CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THE APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF WRITTEN SUBMISSI ONS AS UNDER: 6.3 I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, STAT EMENT OF FACTS, GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS CA REFULLY. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS DISCUSSED BY THE A.O. IN THE ASSE SSMENT ORDER, I AM OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE DISALLO WANCE MADE BY THE A.O. ARE QUITE REASONABLE AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF LAW. ACCORDINGLY, THE DISALLOWANCE MA DE BY THE A.O. ARE HEREBY CONFIRMED. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT PASSED A SPEAKIN G ORDER IN RESPECT OF THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, TH EREFORE, WE DEEM IT PROPER AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE RESTORE TH E ISSUES RAISED IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) TO BE DE CIDED AFRESH AFTER GIVING PROPER AND EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HE ARD TO THE ASSESSEE. ITA 677/JP/2016_ SURESH CHAND GUPTA VS ITO 4 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10/04/2018. SD/- SD/- HKKXPAN DQY HKKJR (BHAGCHAND) (KUL BHARAT) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 10 TH APRIL, 2018 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- SHRI SURESH CHAND GUPTA, HINDAUN CITY . 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO, WARD 3, SAWAI MADHOPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 677/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR