SATISH MANDOWARA, MUMBAI V. D.C.I.T. CEN. 39, MUMBAI

ITA 8867/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 886719914 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-06-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 02-05-2012
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 30-12-2011
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PARTHSARTHI NAIK
• Keywords: Salary income; Reasonable cause
• Section: 80C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SMC BENCH (MUMBAI) BEFORE SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A. NO.8867/MUM/2011 (A.Y. 2008-09) SHRI SATISH MANDOWARA, 74G, MANGAL KARNI, SIDDARTH NAGAR, GOREGAON (W), MUMBAI-400 062. PAN: ACWPM3495P VS. DY. COMMR. OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL-39, MUMBAI. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SHRI NIRAJ SHETH. RESPONDENT BY SHRI P ARTHSARTHI NAIK. DATE OF HEARING 02-05-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 01-06-2012 O R D E R IN THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE IMP UGNED ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-41, MUMBAI, DATED 18-10-2011 FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. IT IS SEEN THAT THIS APPEAL IS TIME BARRED BY 2 DAYS. I HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND ALSO CONSIDERED THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE AS SESSEE FOR DELAY CONDONATION WHICH IS SUPPORTED BY AFFIDAVIT. IN MY OPINION, THE RE IS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR ITA NO.8867/MUM/2011 SATISH MANDOWARA 2 NOT FILING THE APPEAL WITHIN THE PERIOD OF LIMITATI ON. I, ACCORDINGLY, CONDONE THE DELAY AND ADMIT THE APPEAL FOR HEARING. 4. THE FIRST ISSUE IS REGARDING THE DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION OF RS.82,239/- CLAIMED U/S. 80C OF THE ACT. THE FACTS REVEALED FRO M THE RECORD ARE AS UNDER. THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2008-09 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,00,090/-. THE ASSESSEES CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND ASSESSMENT IS COMPLETED U/SEC.1432(3) OF THE ACT. T HE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN SALARY INCOME FROM M/S. ALLIANCE INTERMEDIATES & NETWORK P VT. LTD. THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED DEDUCTION UNDER CHAPTER VIA, MORE PARTICUL ARLY U/S. 80C, AS UNDER : 1. LIC OF INDIA 29,000 2. AVIVA LIFE 12,000 3. NSC 40,000 4. ACCRUED INTEREST ON NSC 1,239 TOTAL 82,239 ====== THE AO DECLINED TO GIVE THE DEDUCTION BY OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRODUCED ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE GRIEVANCE IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) BUT WITHOUT SUCCESS. 5. I HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED FORM NO.16 IN RESPECT OF SALARY INCO ME FROM M/S. ALLIANCE INTERMEDIATES & NETWORK PVT. LTD. IN WHICH DEDUCTIO N U/S. 80C AT RS.82,239/- WAS SHOWN. HE, THEREFORE, PLEADED THAT ONCE THE EMP LOYER HAS CERTIFIED THE ITA NO.8867/MUM/2011 SATISH MANDOWARA 3 DEDUCTION, THERE IS NO NEED AGAIN TO FILE SEPARATE EVIDENCE. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED COPY OF FORM NO. 16 WHICH IS PLACED AT PAGES. NOS. 9-10 OF THE COMPILATION. IT IS SEEN THAT THE EMPLOYER HAS SHOWN DEDUCTION U/S.8 0C ETC. AT RS.82,239/-. IN MY OPINION, ONCE THE EMPLOYER HAS CERTIFIED A DEDUCTIO N, THEN THE AO SHOULD ACCEPT THE SAME. I, ACCORDINGLY, DIRECT THE AO TO VERIFY F ORM NO. 16 AND ALLOW THE DEDUCTION TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. GROUND NO. 3 IS IN RESPECT OF ADDITION OF RS.2, 40,000/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED LOW WITHDRAWALS. 7. THE AO HAS OBSERVED THAT IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN THE TOTAL WITHDRAWALS TO THE EXTENT OF RS.82,700/- . THE AO WAS NOT SATISFIED AS IN A. Y. 2006-07 AS PER RECORD THE ADDITIONAL CASH EXPENSES WERE TAKEN AT RS.15,000/- P.M. THE AO, THEREFORE, ESTIMATED THE U NACCOUNTED CASH EXPENSES ON ACCOUNT OF LOW WITHDRAWALS AND MADE ADDITION OF RS.2,40,000/-. THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE SAME. 8. BEFORE ME, IT WAS ARGUED THAT THE ASSESSEES WIF E IS ALSO EARNING INCOME AND SHE CONTRIBUTED THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES. THE ASS ESSEE COULD NOT CONTROVERT WHY ADDITION OF RS.15,000/- P.M. WAS MADE TOWARDS UNACCOUNTED CASH EXPENSES IN IMMEDIATE PRECEDING YEAR. IN MY OPINION, THE ADD ITION MADE BY THE AO IS ON A HIGHER SIDE. IF THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURE IS ESTI MATED AT RS.10,000/- P.M., AN YEARLY EXPENDITURE OF RS.1,20,000/- WOULD MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. I, THEREFORE, ITA NO.8867/MUM/2011 SATISH MANDOWARA 4 DIRECT THE AO TO TAKE THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES FOR TH E YEAR AT RS.1,20,000/- AND GIVE THE SET OFF OF HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE I.E. RS.82,700/- AND THE BALANCE AMOUNT IS TO BE ADDED TOWARDS LOW W ITHDRAWALS I.E. RS.37,300/- IN PLACE OF RS,.2,40,000/- AND ACCORDINGLY ADDITION IS SUSTAINED TO THAT EXTENT. THE ASSESSEE PARTLY SUCCEEDS ON GROUND NO. 3. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS PARTLY A LLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE, 2012. SD/ - (R.S. PADVEKAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI: 30TH MAY , 2012. NG: COPY TO : 1. ASSESSEE. 2. DEPARTMENT. 3 CIT(A)-41, MUMBAI. 4 CIT, CENTRAL-III,MUMBAI. 5.DR,SMC BENCH, MUMBAI. 6.MASTER FILE. (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER, / / TRUE COPY / / ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.