Arvind Kumar Nand Kumar Limited, Kolkata V. D.C.I.T Cir - 9,kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 681/KOL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3161 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 01-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SATYENDRA MOHAN DAS J
• Assessee Lawyers: P BHATTES
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH C KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 681 / KOL / 2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009-10 ARVIND KUMAR NAND KUMAR LIMITED, 30, KALI KRISHANA TAGORE STREET KOLKATA [ AACCA 6319 F ] V/S . DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-9, P-7, CHOWRINGHEE SQURE, KOLKATA-700 069 /APPELLANT .. / RESPONDENT /BY APPELLANT SHRI P.BHATTES, A.R /BY RESPONDENT SHRI SATYENDRA MOHAN DAS, JCIT-DR /DATE OF HEARING 19-01-2016 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 10-02-2016 / O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS ARISING OUT OF ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-VIII, KOLKATA IN APPEAL NO.266/CIT(A)-VIII/KOL/11-12 DATED 25.02 .2013. ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY ACIT,RANGE-9, KOLKATA U/S 143(3) OF THE I NCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) VIDE HI S ORDER DATED 20.12.2011 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 AND ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS NOT COMPLIED WITH PROVISION OF IT ACT AND GUIDELINE OF SCRUTINY ITA NO.681/KOL/2013 A.Y. 2009-10 ARVIND KR. NAND KR. LTD. V. DCIT, CIR-9 KOL. PAGE 2 ASSESSMENT IN RESPECT OF DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITUR E RS.3,00LAC TO THIS EXTENT IS BAD IN LAW. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. C.I.T (APPEAL) WRONGLY CONFIRMED ALLEGING THE DISALLOWANC E MADE ON AN AGREED LUMP SUM AMOUNT OF RS. 3.00 LACS TO ASSESS TAXABLE INCOME U/S 143(3) OF IT ACT IN SPITE OF NO CONSENT WAS FURNISHED BY THE APP ELLANT TO AGREE FOR LUMP SUM DISALLOWANCE AMOUNT OF RS.3,.00 LAC KNOWINGLY A TTRACTION OF PENALTIES & PROSECUTION WHICH IS EXCESSIVE, UNJUSTIFIED, UNWARR ANTED. OUR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AGREED IN PURSUANCE OF QUERY BY LD A SSESSING OFFICER FOR CERTAIN DEFECTIVE BILL AND SOME EXPENSES SUPPORTED BY SELF MADE VOUCHER IN THE SCRUTINY MAY BE FOUND. THIS CONSENT CAN NEVER BE CO NSIDERED AUTHORIZATION OF LUMP SUM DISALLOWANCE RS.3.00 LAC BUT DISALLOWANCE SHOULD BE DETERMINED ON MERITS. 2. IT WAS OBSERVED AT THE TIME OF HEARING THAT GROU ND NO.1 AND 2 ARE COMMON THEREFORE THEY ARE CLUBBED TOGETHER TO PASS A CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. THE COMMON ISSUES RAISED BY ASSESSEE ARE THAT LD. C IT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DISAL LOWING THE EXPENSES FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.3 LACS ON ACCOUNT OF SELF-MADE VOUCHER AND DEFECTIVE BILLS. 3. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IN T HE PRESENT CASE IS A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY AND RUNNING A HUSKING MIL L. IT BUYS PADDY, PROCESSES IT INTO RICE AND SALE IT INTO THE MARKET. IT IS ALSO ENGAGED INTO DIRECT TRADING OF RICE. DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2 008-09 THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO STARTED A NEW VENTURE OF MANUFACTURING AND SUP PLY OF ELECTRIC POLE. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ASSESSEE WAS ASKE D BY A.O. TO FURNISH THE DETAILS OF VARIOUS BILLS FOR THE EXPENS ES CLAIMED BY IT. ASSESSEE FURNISHED THE SAME BUT ON VERIFICATION OF THE SAME IT WAS REVEALED THAT THE SOME OF THE BILLS WERE DEFECTIVE AND SOME OF THE EXPENSES WERE INCURRED WITH SELF MADE VOUCHERS. HEN CE THE A.O. DISALLOWED THE EXPENSES TO THE TUNE OF RS. 3.00 LAC S WITH THE CONSENT OF ITA NO.681/KOL/2013 A.Y. 2009-10 ARVIND KR. NAND KR. LTD. V. DCIT, CIR-9 KOL. PAGE 3 THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE ORDER SHEET NOTING DATED 13.12.2011. HENCE THIS AMOUNT OF RS. 3.00 LACS WAS ADDED BACK TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF DEFECTIVE OR I NSUFFICIENT SUPPORTING VOUCHERS. 4. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A) AND OBJECTED TO THE STERN ACTION OF THE A.O. FOR DISALL OWING THE SUM OF RS. 3.00 LACS ON ACCOUNT OF DEFECTIVE AND INSUFFICIENT SUPPORTING VOUCHERS. HOWEVER THE CIT (A) OUT RIGHTLY REJECTED THE PLEA O F THE ASSESSEE AND UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE AO BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE FACTS OF THE CASE, THIS SUB- GROUND 1 (II) OF THE APPEAL REGARDING DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF THE DEFECTIVE BILLS OF RS. 3,00,000/- IS CONFIRMED AS BECAUSE THIS DISALLOWANCE IS AN AGREED DISALLOWANCE AND NO APPEAL SHOULD HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE APPELLANT ON T HIS ISSUE. THUS, THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS DISMISSED. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THIS ORDER OF CIT (APPEAL) ASSES SEE CAME IN SECOND APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE CONTENTIONS OF THE RIVAL PARTI ES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. BEFORE US THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE BILLS WERE DULY SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT. THE AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE NEVER AGREED FOR THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. FROM THE AFORESAID DISCUSSION WE FIND THAT THE AO HAS MADE THE ADDITION BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO SU BMIT THE BILL IN SUPPORT OF THE EXPENSES CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. ON THE SPECIFIC QUERY FROM THE BENCH TO THE AR REGARDING THE PRODUCTION O F THE BILL WHICH WAS DISALLOWED BY THE AO, THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUC E THE SAME. IN VIEW OF ABOVE WE FIND NO SUBSTANCE IN THE CASE OF THE AS SESSEE AND THE LD. AR ALSO FAILED TO PRODUCE THE BILL WHICH WAS THE SU BJECT MATTER OF THE ITA NO.681/KOL/2013 A.Y. 2009-10 ARVIND KR. NAND KR. LTD. V. DCIT, CIR-9 KOL. PAGE 4 DISALLOWANCE. THEREFORE WE ARE INCLINED NOT TO INTE RFERE IN THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 6. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 10/02/2016 SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (WASEEM AHMED) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) KOLKATA, *DKP !- 10 / 02 /201 6 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / APPELLANT-ARVIND KUMAR NAND KUMAR LTD. 30, KALI KRISHNA TAGORE STREET KOLKATA-07 2. / RESPONDENT-DCIT, CIR-9, P-7, CHOWRINGHEE SQUARE, KOLKATA-69 3. ) *+ , , - / CONCERNED CIT KOLKATA 4. , , -- / CIT (A) KOLKATA 5. 012 33*+, , *+ , / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6. 267 89 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , , /TRUE COPY/ / , *+ ,