SHRI VINAY VIJAYVARGIYA, Ujjain V. THE ITO Wd-2(2), Ujjain

ITA 783/IND/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5743 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 01-03-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 12-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA

Judgement Text

VINAY VIJAYVARGIYA ITA 783 OF 2014 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 783/IND/2014 A.Y. 2011-12 VINAY VIJAYVARGIYA, NAGDA PAN AGKPV 0756 G :: APPELLANT VS ITO, WARD-2(2), UJJAIN :: RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY SHRI SHARAD JAIN, CA RESPONDENT BY SHRI R.A. VERMA, DR DATE OF HEARING 1.3.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 1.3.2016 O R D E R PER SHRI B.C. MEENA, AM THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGING T HE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-UJJAIN, DATED 02.9.2014. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS WITH RE GARD TO THE CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION OF RS.5,71,245/-. FACTS, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT ON PERUSAL OF THE DETAILS, THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE AS SESSEE HAS NOT MENTIONED ABOUT THE WHOLESALE BUSINESS. THE ASSESSE E EXPLAINED VINAY VIJAYVARGIYA ITA 783 OF 2014 2 THAT IN THE RETAIL BUSINESS, HE WAS SHOWING N.P. @2 5.8% AND TRANSACTIONS PERTAINING TO ICICI BANK WERE FOR WHOL ESALE BUSINESS, THEREFORE, HE REQUESTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO AP PLY N.P. @8% AS PER SECTION 44AD. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MA DE AN ADDITION OF TOTAL DEPOSITS IN ICICI BANK AT RS.22,1 4,129/-. AGAINST THE SAME, THE ASSESSEE APPROACHED THE LD. CIT(A), W HO WAS OF THE VIEW THAT N.P. @25.8% ON WHOLESALE BUSINESS SHOULD BE ADDED AND NOT TOTAL DEPOSITS IN ICICI BANK AT RS.22,14,129/-. THUS, LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION AT RS.5,71,245 APPLYING N.P. @25.8% OF TOTAL DEPOSITS. STILL AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE U S. 3. BEFORE US, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AND CONTENDED THAT LD. CIT(A) DID NOT CONSIDER THE SUBMISSIONS AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION AT RS.5,71,245/-. LEARNED CO UNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IN SUBSEQUENT YEAR, THE ASS ESSING OFFICER HAS ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE APPLYING 8% N .P. ON THE WHOLESALE BUSINESS. THEREFORE, LD. CIT(A) IS NOT JU STIFIED IN APPLYING N.P. @25.8%. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR RELIED ON TH E ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. VINAY VIJAYVARGIYA ITA 783 OF 2014 3 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE FILE . THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A PAPER BOOK RUNNING INTO 12 PAGES ALONG WITH WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS, WHEREIN, MANY DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN ANNE XED. ASSESSEE HAS AGITATED THAT THE DOCUMENTS HAVE NOT B EEN APPRECIATED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES IN THE PROPE R PERSPECTIVE. ALL THESE REQUIRE PROPER CONSIDERATION AT THE LEVEL OF THE AO. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ADOPTED N.P.@ 8% ON WHOLESALE BUSINESS IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR. IF ASSESSEES CLAIM REGARDING WHOLESALE BUSINESS FOUND GENUINE THEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER S HALL GIVE DUE CONSIDERATION THE FACT THAT IN SUBSEQUENT YEAR, THE N.P. HAS BEEN ADOPTED @8% ON WHOLESALE BUSINESS. THE AO SHALL DEC IDE THE ISSUE AFRESH AFTER GIVING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARIN G TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO FILE ANY FURTHE R EVIDENCE, IF ANY, IN SUPPORT OF CLAIM. THUS, THE ISSUE IS ALLOWED FO R STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 01.3.2016 . SD/- ( D.T. GARASIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- (B.C. MEENA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 01.3.2016 !VYS! COPY TO: APPELLANT / RESPONDENT / CIT(A) / CIT / DR, INDORE