Amit Mittal, Kolkata V. ITO, Ward - 1(1), Siliguri, Siliguri

ITA 849/KOL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 84923514 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-11-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 03-06-2011
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DAVID Z CHAWNGTHU LD
• Assessee Lawyers: V N PUROHIT FCA LD

Judgement Text

, B , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH- B KOLKATA ( ) BEFORE . . , SHRI R.S. SYAL,, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /AND ! ' 1 $% , SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & / ITA NO. 849/KOL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 5 - 06 AMIT MITTAL PAN:ADIPM0326P - % - -VERSUS -. I.T.O WARD 1(1), SILIGURI ( $( / APPELLANT ) ( )*$( / RESPONDENT ) $( , /FOR THE APPELLANT / SHRI V.N. PUROHIT, FCA, LD. AR )*$( , / FOR THE RESPONDENT: / SHRI DAVID Z. CHAWNGTHU, LD. ADDL. CIT, SR.DR -%. / 0 /DATE OF HEARING : 19-11-2013 12 / 0 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:21/11/2013 3 / ORDER ! ' 1 $% , SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE O RDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), SILIGURI IN APPEAL NO. 54/CIT (A)/SLG/2010-11 DATED 18.03.2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. . 2. SHRI V.N. PUROHIT, FCA, LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. AND SHRI DAVID Z. CHAWNGTHU, LEARNED ADDL. CIT/SR.DR REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 3. IN THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IN ITA NO. 849/KOL/201 1 A.Y 2005-06, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- (1) THAT THE CIT(A) HAS, ON THE FACTS AND UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,68,112/- BEING INSURANCE PREM IUM PAID AND DULY DISCLOSED IN HIS BALANCE SHEET. (2) THAT LIKEWISE THE CIT(A) HAS FURTHER ERRED (I) IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 163,380/- BEI NG COST OF COMPUTER PURCHASED FOR AND PAID BY THE COMPANY, (II) IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 153,500/- BE ING CASH WITHDRAWN THROUGH CREDIT CARD IN HIS NAME PAID BY THE COMPANY AND SO WITHDRAWN FOR COMPANYS PURPOSE. ITA NO. 849/KOL/2011-B-GM 2 (III) IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 246,164/- B EING FOREIGN TRAVEL EXPENSES INCURRED BY ASSESSEE AS A DIRECTOR AND TRAVELLED FO R THE COMPANYS BUSINESS. (3) THAT THE ASSESSEE CRAVE LEAVE TO ADD TO, AMEND OR WITHDRAW ANY GROUND ON OR BEFORE THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORISE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT HE WISHED TO NOT PRESS GROUND NO.1, AS THE ISSUE HAS ALREADY BEEN RESTORED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR VERIFICATION. 5. IN REGARD TO GROUND NO.2, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORISE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THIS WAS AGAINST THE VARIOUS ADDITIO NS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WHICH HAD BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TA X(APPEALS). IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS UNABLE TO PRODUCE ALL THE EVIDENCES I N THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A DIRECTOR IN M/S. DOOARS TRA NSPORT LTD AND ALL THE EXPENSES HAVE BEEN INCURRED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPANY. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY BE GRANTED ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO PRODUCE ALL THE EVIDENCES BEFORE TH E ASSESSING OFFICER. 6. IN REPLY, THE LEARNED SR.DR SUBMITTED THAT HE HAS NO OBJECTION IF THE ISSUE IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE-ADJUDICATION . 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS. AS IT IS NO TICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRODUCED ALL THE EVIDENCES BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS ALSO THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), THE ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRMED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS). AS IT IS FUR THER NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOW AGREED TO PRODUCE ALL THE DETAILS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER, THE ISSUES IN THE APPEAL ARE RESTORED TO THE FI LE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE-ADJUDICATION AFTER GR ANTING THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CASE. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE AS STATED ABOVE. 4 3 - 5 -% 6 47 THIS ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 21/11/1 3 SD/- SD/- ( . . , ) ( R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ( ! ' 1 $ % , ) (GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ) ( (( ( 0 0 0 0 ) )) ) DATE 21/11/13 ITA NO. 849/KOL/2011-B-GM 3 3 / ),,8 982: / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. . $( / THE APPELLANT : SHRI AMIT MITTAL M/S. DOOARS TRA NSPORT LTD. C/O V.N PUROHIT & CO. CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS 32, G.C AVENUE, 2 ND FL., KOL-13. 2 )*$( / THE RESPONDENT- THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 (1), SILIGURI. 3 4. . ,3% / THE CIT ,3% ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5 . ;,6 ),% / DR, KOLKATA BENCH 6 . GUARD FILE . *8 ),/ TRUE COPY, 3%-/ BY ORDER, 4 /ASSTT REGISTRAR **PRADIP