Sri Dinabandhu Biswas, Nadia V. ITO, Ward - 41(2), Nadia , Nadia

ITA 706/KOL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5246 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 16-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SITAL CHANDRA DAS
• Assessee Lawyers: S BHATTACHARY A
• Section: 143(3); 133(6)

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO 706/KOL/2018 ASSESS MENT YEAR:2014-2015 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA B(SMC) BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, VICE-PRESIDENT (KZ) I.T.A. NO. 706/KOL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-2015 SRI DINABANDHU BISWAS,............................. ...........................APPELLANT VILL. MALIPOTA, P.O. FULIA BOYRA, SANTIPUR, NADIA-741 402 [PAN: AKVPB 1853 B] -VS.- INCOME TAX OFFICER,................ ....RESPONDENT WARD-41(2), NADIA, ANANT HARI MITRA ROAD, NEDIAR PARA, KRISHNANAGAR, NADIA-741101 APPEARANCES BY: SHRI S. BHATTACHARYA, ADVOCATE, FOR THE APPELLANT SHRI SITAL CHANDRA DAS, ADDL. CIT, SR. D.R. , FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : OCTOBER 22, 2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : OCTOBER 22, 2018 O R D E R THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-12, KOLKATA DA TED 22.12.2017, WHEREBY HE CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF RS.4,10,570/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF COM MISSION. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CASE IS AN INDIVIDUA L, WHO IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING OF GOODS OF PARLEY PRODUCTS PVT. LIMITED AND ALSO ACTS AS A COMMISSION AGENT FOR DIFFERENT TELECOM PR ODUCTS. THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS FILED B Y HIM ON 22.03.2015 DECLARING A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.5,21,560/-. DURING T HE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IT WAS NOTICED BY THE ASSES SING OFFICER THAT THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION HAD RE CEIVED COMMISSION OF RS.41,05,700/- FROM RELIANCE TELECOM LIMITED AND TH E SAME WAS ENTIRELY I.T.A. NO 706/KOL/2018 ASSESS MENT YEAR:2014-2015 PAGE 2 OF 3 PASSED OVER BY HIM TO THE SUB-AGENTS. HE, THEREFORE , REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO OFFER HIS EXPLANATION IN THIS MATTER. T HE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, COULD NOT OFFER ANY EXPLANATION TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THIS ISSUE AND CONSEQUENTLY THE COMMISSION CLAIM ED TO BE PAID BY THE ASSESSEE WAS DISALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE EXTENT OF RS.4,10,570/- BEING 10% OF THE TOTAL COMMISSION PA ID AMOUNTING TO RS.41,05,700/- IN THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SE CTION 143(3) VIDE AN ORDER DATED 20.12.2016. 3. AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R UNDER SECTION 143(3), AN APPEAL WAS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE BEF ORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) CHALLENGING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.4,1 0,570/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF COMMISSION AND SINC E THERE WAS NO PROPER COMPLIANCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO TH E NOTICES ISSUED BY HIM FIXING THE SAID APPEAL FOR HEARING FROM TIME TO TIME, THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE V IDE HIS APPELLATE ORDER DATED 22.12.2017 PASSED EX-PARTE . AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED THIS APPEA L BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. BESIDES EXPL AINING THE NON- COMPLIANCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE C OURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), THE LD. CO UNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT THE ENTIRE COMMISSION INCOME EAR NED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO BE PASSED OVER TO THE SUB-AGENTS AS PER THE MODUS OPERANDI FOLLOWED IN THE BUSINESS AND THE SAME WAS DULY EXPLAINED BY M/S. RELIANCE TELECOM LIMITED VIDE ITS LETTER DATED 10.10.2016 DIRECTLY WRITTEN TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 133(6) OF THE ACT. HE HAS ALSO FILED A COPY OF THE SAID LETTER PLACED AT PAGES NO. 2 & 3 OF HIS PAPER BOOK ALONG WITH THE RELEVANT ANNEXURE. AS POINTED OUT BY THE LD. D.R. IN THIS REGARD, THE SAI D LETTER, HOWEVER, WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON 26.12.2016, I. E. ONLY AFTER PASSING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER SECTION 133(6) ON 20.12. 2016. IT IS THUS CLEAR I.T.A. NO 706/KOL/2018 ASSESS MENT YEAR:2014-2015 PAGE 3 OF 3 THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER COULD NOT VERIFY THE CLA IM OF THE ASSESSEE AS REGARDS THE PAYMENT OF ENTIRE COMMISSION TO THE SUB -AGENTS ON THE BASIS OF THE LETTER DATED 10.10.2016 SENT DIRECTLY BY M/S . RELIANCE TELECOM LIMITED IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER UNDER SECTION 133(6). KEEPING IN VIEW THIS POSITION MANIF EST FROM THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD, I CONSIDER IT FAIR AND PROPER AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) ON THE ISSUE UNDER CONSIDERATION AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH AFTER VERIFYIN G THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE OF HAVING PAID THE ENTIRE COMMISSION INCOM E TO THE SUB-AGENTS FROM THE LETTER DATED 10.10.2016 RECEIVED FROM M/S. RELIANCE TELECOM LIMITED AS WELL AS OTHER DETAILS ANNEXED TO THE SAI D LETTER. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TRE ATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON OCTOBER 22, 2 018. SD/- (P.M. JAGTAP) VICE-PRESIDENT (KZ) KOLKATA, THE 22 ND DAY OF OCTOBER, 2018 COPIES TO : (1) SRI DINABANDHU BISWAS, VILL. MALIPOTA, P.O. FULIA BOYRA, SANTIPUR, NADIA-741 402 (2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-41(2), NADIA, ANANT HARI MITRA ROAD, NEDIAR PARA, KRISHNANAGAR, NADIA-741101 (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-12, KOLK ATA, (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- , (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.