P.Omprakash, Cuddalore V. ITO, Cuddalore

ITA 883/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6351 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 11-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUPRIYO PAL
• Assessee Lawyers: D ANAND
• Keywords: Bonafide belief

Judgement Text

, .. , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , SMC C BENCH, CHENNAI . , BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.883/MDS/2017 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) SHRI P OMPRAKASH, PROP VSL & CO. 46-GANDHI NAGAR, SEMMANDALAM, CUDDALORE VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I, CUDDALORE PAN: AAPPO1830R ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI D. ANAND, ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUPRIYO PAL, JCIT /DATE OF HEARING : 14.06.2017 ! /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.08.2017 / O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEA LS)- PUDUCHERRY, DATED 24.08.2016 IN ITA NO.331/CIT(A)-P DY/2013-14 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 PASSED U/S.250(6) R .W.S.144 OF THE ACT. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE APPEAL WITH A DELAY O F 149 DAYS. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE DELAY HAD OCCURRED SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS ON THE BONAFIDE BELIEF THAT HE HAD HANDED OVER THE APPELLATE ORDER TO HIS CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT FOR FILING THE AP PEAL. LATER ON IT 2 ITA NO.883/MDS/2017 WAS BROUGHT TO HIS KNOWLEDGE THAT BY OVERSIGHT HE H AD NOT HANDED OVER THE REQUISITE DOCUMENTS TO HIS CHARTERED ACCOU NTANT FOR FILING THE APPEAL. THEREFORE THE LD. AR PLEADED THAT THE INADVERTENT DELAY MAY BE CONDONED. THE LD. DR STRONGLY OBJECTED TO T HE SUBMISSION OF THE LD. AR. AFTER HEARING BOTH SIDES, THOUGH I DO NOT APPRECIATE THE LETHARGIC ATTITUDE OF THE ASSESSEE, IN THE INTE REST OF JUSTICE, IM OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE DELAY OF 149 DAYS IN F ILING THE APPEAL REQUIRES TO BE CONDONED. ACCORDINGLY I HEREBY COND ONE THE DELAY OF 149 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AND P ROCEED TO HEAR THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 3. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED SEVERAL GROUNDS IN HIS A PPEAL, HOWEVER THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE IS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRI EVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD.AO, WHICH WAS FURTHER CONFIRMED BY THE LD .CIT(A), WHEREIN ADDITION WAS MADE BASED ON 8% PROFIT ESTIMATED ON A DMITTED SALES. 4. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E IS AN INDIVIDUAL EARNING INCOME FROM RETAIL SALE OF BLUE METAL, FILE D HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 ON 30.09.200 9 ADMITTING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.3,76,400/-. INITIALLY THE RETUR N WAS PROCESSED U/S. 143(1) OF THE ACT AND SUBSEQUENTLY THE CASE WAS SEL ECTED FOR 3 ITA NO.883/MDS/2017 SCRUTINY UNDER CASS AND FINALLY ORDER WAS PASSED U/ S.144 OF THE ACT ON 27.12.2011, WHEREIN THE LD.AO ASSESSED THE T OTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS RS.13,70,750/-. 5. DURING THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, NEIT HER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS REPRESENTATIVE PRODUCED ANY BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND EVIDENCE FOR CLAIMING THE EXPENDITURES. THEREF ORE, THE LD.AO ESTIMATED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT 8% OF ADMIT TED SALES AND THEREBY ADDED RS.8,06,910/- TO THE INCOME OF THE AS SESSEE. EVEN AT THE TIME OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CO-OPERATED WITH THE LD.CIT(A) AND GROSSLY FAILED TO PRODUCE TH E DOCUMENTS CALLED FOR, IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH THE CLAIM OF EXPE NDITURE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF HIS BUSINESS. IN THIS SITUATION, I AM ALSO OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THERE IS NO OTH ER RECOURSE TO THE REVENUE RATHER THAN TO ESTIMATE THE PROFIT. HOWEVE R CONSIDERING THE NATURE OF BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE AND PLACE OF BUS INESS BEING CUDDALORE WHICH IS NOT A METROPOLITAN CITY, IM OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT AN ESTIMATE OF 5% ON THE ADMITTED SALES W OULD SUFFICE TO MEET THE END OF JUSTICE. THEREFORE, I HEREBY DIREC T THE LD.AO TO REFRAME THE ASSESSMENT BY ESTIMATING THE PROFIT AT 5% ON THE 4 ITA NO.883/MDS/2017 ADMITTED SALES ALONG WITH THE OTHER INCOME DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PART LY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 14 TH AUGUST, 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER '# /CHENNAI, $% /DATED 14 TH AUGUST, 2017 JR % '( )( /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. , ( )/CIT(A) 4. , /CIT 5. (-. / /DR 6. .0 /GF