M/s Reliant Infrastructure P. Ltd., Chandigarh V. ITO, W-2(3), Chandigarh

ITA 888/CHANDI/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7299 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-04-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 04-06-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHOK KHANNA CIT
• Keywords: Depreciation; Earning of tax free income; TDS; Set aside
• Section: 43B; 14A

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH SMC CHANDIGARH !', # BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM ./ ITA NO. 888/CHD/2019 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 M/S RELIANT INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD., SCO 50, SECTOR 17-E, CHANDIGARH. VS THE ITO, WARD 2(3), CHANDIGARH. ./ PAN NO: AADCR1947F / APPELLANT / RESPONDENT ! ' / ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PARIKSHIT AGGARWAL, C.A. # ! ' / REVENUE BY : SHRI ASHOK KHANNA, ADDL. CIT $ % ! &/ DATE OF HEARING : 17.03.2021 '()* ! &/ D ATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05.04.2021 HEARING CONDUCTED VIA WEBEX $%/ ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHEREIN THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 02.04.2019 OF CI T(A)-1 CHANDIGARH PERTAINING TO 2013-14 ASSESSMENT YEAR IS ASSAILED ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. THAT ON THE FACTS, CIRCUMSTANCES AND LEGAL POSITION OF THE CASE, THE WORTHY CIT IN ITS ORDER DATED 02.04.2019 HAS ERRED IN PASSING THA T ORDER IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 250(6) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THAT ON LAW, FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, T HE WORTHY CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO WHEREIN HE HAD NOT ALLOWED THE PRAYER OF THE APPELLANT MADE DURING ASSESSMENT TO REDUCE THE ERRONEOUSLY MA DE SUO-MOTTO DISALLOWANCE OF RS.66,91,000/- MADE U/S 14A BY THE APPELLANT IN ITS BALANCE SHEET AND CONSEQUENTLY IN THE ITR EVEN WHEN APPELLANT HAD NOT EARNED OR CLAIMED A NY EXEMPT INCOME AND FURTHER IT HAS NOT INCURRED ANY EXPENSE FOR THIS INVESTMENT. ITA 888/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2013-14 PAGE 2 OF 5 3. THAT ON LAW, FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, T HE WORTHY CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO WHEREIN HE HAD MADE ADDITION OF RS. 2,49,632/- BY DISALLOWING VARIOUS EXPS. BY HOLDING THEM AS UNVOUC HED EVEN WHEN THE EXPENSES HAD GENUINELY BEEN PAID AND MOSTLY THROUGH BANKING CHAN NEL. 4. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE FOR ANY ADDITION, D ELETION OR AMENDMENT IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON OR BEFORE THE DISPOSAL OF THE SAME. 2. THE LD. AR INVITING ATTENTION TO THE GROUNDS RAI SED AND THE IMPUGNED ORDER SUBMITTED THAT IN THE PRESENT APPEAL THE LIMITED PRAYER OF THE ASSESSEE IS FOR RESTORING THE ISSUE B ACK FOR A PROPER CONSIDERATION ON MERITS. 3. INVITING ATTENTION TO GROUND NO. 2 & 3 AND PARAS 5.2 AND 7.2 RESPECTIVELY. ADDRESSING THE FIRST ISSUE, IT W AS SUBMITTED THAT PAPER BOOK PAGE 25 AND 39 TO 44 WOULD SHOW THA T EVEN BEFORE THE AO, THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED THAT DISA LLOWANCE MADE WAS CONTRARY TO FACTS AND LAW. ADDRESSING THE SECOND ISSUE, WHILE DENYING RELIEF, IT WAS SUBMITTED, THE CIT(A) CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCES OBJECTED ON THE GROUNDS T HAT THE IN- HOUSE VOUCHED EXPENSES OF GARDENER, KITCHEN STAFF E TC. WERE UNSIGNED BY THE AR, THIS WAS THE ONLY OBJECTION. I T WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT NO FRESH EVIDENCE WAS FILED AND THE EVIDENCE RELIED UPON BY ITS VERY NATURE HAD TO BE SELF VOUCHED AND IN CASE THE ONLY SHORTCO MING WAS LACK OF A.RS SIGNATURE, THE DEFICIENCY WOULD HAVE BEEN MADE GOOD HAD SUCH AN OPPORTUNITY BEEN PROVIDED. IT WAS ASSAILED THAT HE FAILED TO LOOK INTO THE RECORD. ITA 888/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2013-14 PAGE 3 OF 5 4. THE LD. SR.DR CONSIDERING THE PRAYER AND RECORD HAD NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST FOR REMAND. 5. THE PARTIES WERE REQUIRED TO ADDRESS AS TO WHICH AUTHORITY THE REMAND SHOULD BE MADE. BOTH THE PARTIES CONSID ERING THE RECORD AGREED FOR A REMAND BACK TO AO WHO CAN LOOK INTO THE NECESSARY RECORD. 6. I HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MAT ERIAL ON RECORD. IT IS SEEN THAT THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO WERE SUSTAINED VIDE PARA 5.2 AND 7.2 HOLDING AS UNDER : 5.2. HELD : I HAVE PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER A ND EXAMINED THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE. BRIEF FACT OF THE CASE I S THAT ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THAT HE HAS SUO-MOTO DISALLOWED RS.66,91,000/- U/S 14A R .W.R. 8D. HOWEVER, THIS DISALLOWANCE HAS BEEN ERRONEOUSLY MADE BY THE ASSES SEE . I HAVE PERUSED THE COMPUTATION OF TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE AY 2013-14 AND OBSERVED THAT ONLY DISALLOWANCES MADE ARE (I) DEPRECIATION R S. 13,54,034/-, (II) INTEREST ON TDS RS.2,048/- AND (III) DISALLOWANCE U/S 43B RS.4,98,779/-. THERE IS NO SUCH SUO MOTO DISALLOWANCE OF RS.66,91,000/- U/S 14A OF THE ACT APPEARING IN THE COMPUTATION OF TOTAL INCOME. THE AR HAS ALSO NOT DE MONSTRATED THAT HE HAS RAISED THIS ISSUE BEFORE THE AO 6UR\NG ASSESSMENT P ROCEEDINGS. THERE IS NO SUCH DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER . HENCE, GROUND OF APPEAL NO. 2 IS DISMISSED. 7.2 HELD : I HAVE PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OF FICER AND EXAMINED THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. AO HAS EXAMINED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND BILL AND VOUCHERS AND FOUND THAT THE A PPELLANT HAS FAILED TO PRODUCE BILLS/VOUCHERS FOR FIFTEEN ITEMS AMOUNTING TO RS.2, 49,6221- AS DETAILED AT PARA 7 SUPRA. DURING APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS NO SUCH BILLS HAVE BEE N PRODUCED. THE JOURNAL VOUCHERS SUBMITTED HAS NO EVIDENTIARY VALUE AS NONE IS FOUND SIGNED BY ANYBODY NOR BEEN AUTHENTICATED BY THE AR. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IS CONFIRMED. THE GROUND OF APPEAL N O.4 IS DISMISSED. (EMPHASIS SUPPLIED) ITA 888/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2013-14 PAGE 4 OF 5 7. ADDRESSING PARA 7 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER REFERRED TO ABOVE, IT IS SEEN THAT THE NATURE OF EXPENSES ARE AS UNDER : PARTICULAR OF EXPENSES AMOUNT (RS. ) I) GOPAL NURSERIES AND AGRO FARM 30,000/- II) VISHABAV KARMA WOOD WORKS 6,500/- III) VISHABAV KARMA WOOD WORKS 2,310/- IV) HDFC BANK 3,500/- V) SHAKTI BUILDING PALACE 10, 094/- VI) SHAKTI BUILDING PALACE 1,803/- VII) VERMA GLASS HOMES 3,80,00/- VIII) SHAKTI BUILDING PALACE 15686/- IX) PUNJAB & SIND BANK 15000/- X) AK SUPPLIERS 31000/- XI) AK SUPPLIERS 5600/- XII) ARYAN ELECTRIC COMPANY 5024/- XIII) ARYAN ELECTRIC COMPANY 2410/- XIV) AK SUPPLIERS 24480/- XV) AK SUPPLIERS 39500/- XVI) PR FIRE SERVICES 8225/- XVII) REFRIGERATOR 9200/- XVIII) FREIGHT & CARTREDGES 1300/- 2,49,632/- THEREFORE, AN ADDITION OF RS. 2,49,632 IS MADE TO T HE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WANT OF BILLS AND VOUCHERS. PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271( 1)(C) ON ACCOUNT OF CONCEALMENT OF INCOME AND FOR FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS AR E INITIATED SEPARATELY ON THIS ACCOUNT.' 8. ACCORDINGLY, IN THE LIGHT OF THE PRAYER OF THE P ARTIES BEFORE THE BENCH ON FACTS AS THEY STAND, THE IMPUGNED ORDE R ON THESE TWO GROUNDS IS SET ASIDE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH THE DIRECTION TO PASS AN ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW A FTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IN ITS OWN INTERESTS IS DIRECTED TO ENSURE FULL AND PROPER PARTICIPATION BEFORE THE AO SO AS TO ENABLE HIM TO PASS AN ORDER ON FACTS. SAID ORDER WAS PRONO UNCED AT THE ITA 888/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2013-14 PAGE 5 OF 5 TIME OF VIRTUAL HEARING ITSELF IN THE PRESENCE OF T HE PARTIES VIA WEBEX. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 05.04.2021. SD/- ( !' ) (DIVA SINGH) # / JUDICIAL MEMBER ' ( / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. / CIT 4. ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. , , / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. / GUARD FILE / BY ORDER, / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR `