Rakesh Kumar Jha, Jamshedpur V. ITO, Jamshedpur

ITA 71/RAN/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9988 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 03-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY PAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P S PAUL
• Keywords: Business income; Corroborative evidences

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI SMC BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 71/RAN/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 - 2010 RAKESH KUMAR JHA, SHATABDI TOWER, 3 RD FLOOR, S.N.P.AREA, SAKCHI, JAMSHDPUR VS. ITO 2(4), 2, BAGMATI ROAD, BISTUPUR, JAMSHEDPUR PAN/GIR NO. ADKPJ 7309 N (APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.S.PAUL , AR REVENUE BY : SHRI SANJAY PAL , DR DATE OF HEARING : 7 /12/ 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 7 /12/ 2016 O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGA INST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - JAMSHEDPUR , DATED 18.12.2015 , FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 2010 . 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1.LD CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN UPHOLDING THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AS SESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF FEES PAID RS.28,99,312/ - TO RUN HIS BUSINESS. 2. THE LD CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS: A) ON ACCOUNT OF FEE RETURNED : RS.42,66,533/ - B) ON ACCOUNT OF CHEQUES DIS HONOURED: RS.11,81,734/ - 2 ITA NO. 71/RAN/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 - 2010 3. LD CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE REMAND REPORT GIVEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN BUSINESS INCOME FROM PROPRIETARY CONCERN M/S. GLOBAL, WHICH IS IN THE BUSINESS OF PROVIDING EDUCATION TO STUDENTS AND PROVIDING THEM SUPPORT IN ADMISSION IN DIFFERENT INSTITUTION S OF THE COUNTRY. DURING THE YE AR, THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN GROSS RECEIPT FROM KVP INTEREST OF RS.39,70,047/ - . THE MAJOR EXPENSES CLAIMED UNDER THE HEAD ARE FEE PAID OF RS.28,99,312/ - . LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT THE ASSESSEE ACTUALLY RECEIVED SERVICE CHARGE FROM ADMISSION, COMMISSION AND TUITION FEE. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE RECEIPTS ARE DULY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND ONLY COMMISSION IS RECEIVED @ RS.25,000/ - PER STUDEN T. THE FEE PAID TO THE INSTITUTIONS AMOUNTS TO RS.28,99,312/ - . THE ADDRESS OF THE INSTITU TIONS WAS PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. LETTERS WERE SENT TO THE INSTITUTIONS FOR CONFIRMATION OF THE FACT BUT NO CONFIRMATION WAS RECEIVED AND IN TWO CASES LETTERS WERE RETURNED BACK. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTS OR SUPPORTING EVIDENCE LIKE PAYMENT RECEIPT OR RECEIPT OF INSTITUTIONS WERE PRODUCED FOR VERIFICATION. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO DISCHARGE ITS ONUS IN RESPECT OF EXPENDITURE CLAIMED. THEREFORE, HE HELD THAT THE EXPENDITURES ARE NOT ALLOWABLE AND ADDED R S.28,99,312/ - TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 3 ITA NO. 71/RAN/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 - 2010 4. BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD CIT(A). 5. LD CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 6. THE CONTENTION OF LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE ME IS THAT THE LD CIT(A) CALLED FOR A REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE LETTER NO.CIT(A)/JSR/R.REPORT/2012 - 13/1371 DATED 21.11.2012. LD A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE REMAND REPORT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE H IS LETTER NO.F.NO.ITO/W - 2(4)/JSR/R .REPORT/RAKESH KR JHA/2012 - 13/1608 DATED 21.12.2012, PLACED AT PAGE 49 OF THE PAPER BOOK. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE LD CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE ORDER ON 18.12.2015 WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE REMAND REPORT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HENCE, IT WAS HIS PRAYER THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER CONSIDERING THE REMAND REPORT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 7. LD D.R. HAD NO OBJECTION TO THE ABOVE SUBMISSION OF LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE. 8. IN THE GIVE N FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, I SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) AND REMAND THE MATTER BACK TO HIS FILE TO RE - ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AFRESH AFTER CONSIDERING THE REMAND REPORT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATED 21.12.2012 AND AFTER AFFO RDING REASONABLE AND PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO BOTH THE PARTIES. 4 ITA NO. 71/RAN/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 - 2010 9 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRO NOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 7 /12/2016 IN THE PRESENCE OF PARTIES. SD/ - (N.S SAINI) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER RANCHI ; DATED 7 /12 /2016 B.K.PARIDA, SPS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, SR.PS, ITAT, CAMP AT RANCHI 1. THE APPELLANT : RAKESH KUMAR JHA, SHATABDI TOWER, 3 RD FLOOR, S.N.P.AREA, SAKCHI, JAMSHDPUR 2. THE RESPONDENT. ITO 2(4), 2, BAGMATI ROAD, BISTUPUR, JAMSHEDPUR 3. THE CIT(A) , JAMSHEDPUR 4. CIT , JAMSHDPUR 5. DR, ITAT, RANCHI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//