Benudhar Rout, Bhubaneswar V. ITO, Ward-2(1), Bhubaneswar

ITA 89/CTK/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7571 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-11-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 14-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D K PRADHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: PRASANNA KUMAR PATTNAIK

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK SMC BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.89 /CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 - 2010 BENUDHAR ROUT, AT/PO: PATIA, BHUBANESWAR. VS. ITO, WARD - 2(1), BHUBANESWAR. PAN/GIR NO. ADIPR 0828 G (APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PRASANNA KUMAR PATTNAIK, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI D.K.PRADHAN , DR DATE OF HEARING : 07 /11 / 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07/11 / 2016 O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - 2, BHUBANESWAR , DATED 19.1.2016 , FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 2010 . 2. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS THAT THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN TREATING THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF RS.18,82,151/ - BEING DIFFERENCE IN THE TRUCK HIRE CHARGES AS SHOWN IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND AS REFLECTED IN FORM NO.26AS AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE . 2 ITA NO.89 /CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 - 2010 3. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 2010 DISCLOSING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.11,64,384/ - . THE ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE BILLS AND VOUCHERS BEFORE HIM AND E STIMATED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT 8% OF THE TOTAL TRANSPORT RECEIPTS OF RS.1,69,05,745/ - AND DETERMINED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS.13,52,460 / - IN AN ASSESSMENT U/S.143(3) OF THE ACT DATED 4.11.2011. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER REOPENED TH E ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT THE GROSS TRANSPORT RECEIPTS AS PER 26AS AVAILABLE ON RECORD WAS RS.1,42,94,367/ - AND THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCLOSED GROSS RECEIPTS OF RS.1,24,12,216 . THE ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED THE DIFFERENTIAL AMOUNT OF RS.1 8,82,151/ - AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AND ADDED THE SAME TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, WHICH WAS CONFIRMED IN APPEAL BY THE LD CIT(A). 4. THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT IN AN ASSESSMENT U/S.143(3) OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HI MSELF HAS DETERMINED THE INCOME AT 8% OF THE GROSS TRANSPORT RECEIPTS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE AND, THEREFORE, IN THE REASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 OF THE ACT, HE WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN TREATING THE ENTIRE DIFFERENTIAL AMOUNT OF TRANSPORT RECEIPTS OF RS.18,82,151/ - AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. HE PRAYED THAT THE INCOME ON THIS DIFFERENTIAL AMOUNT OF RS.18,82,151/ - SHOULD BE DETERMINED AT 8%. 3 ITA NO.89 /CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 - 2010 5. `LD D.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES. 6. AFTER CARE FULLY CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSING THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD, I FIND FORCE IN THE ARGUMENTS OF LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE. UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT, IT IS THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH HAS TO BE BROUGHT TO TAX AND NOT THE BUSINES S RECEIPTS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HIMSELF IN AN ASSESSMENT U/S.143(3) OF THE ACT AFTER REJECTING THE BOOK RESULTS OF THE ASSESSEE, ESTIMATED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT 8% OF THE GROSS TRANSPORT RECEIPTS. THEREFORE, I AM OF THE CONSIDER ED VIEW THAT IT WOULD BE JUST AND FAIR TO ESTIMATE THE INCOME FROM DIFFERENTIAL TRANSPORT RECEIPTS OF RS.18,82,151/ - AT 8% OF THE SAME. I, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES AND DETERMINE THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON DIFFERENTIAL TRANSP ORT RECEIPTS OF R S.18,82,151/ - BY APPLYING RATE OF 8% AT RS.1,50,572/ - AND DELETE THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF ADDITION OF RS. 17,31,579/ - . THUS, THE GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDE R PRONOUNCE D IN THE OPEN COURT ON 07/11 /2016 IN THE PRESENCE OF PARTIES. SD/ - ( N.S SAINI) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER CUTTACK; DATED 07/11 /2016 4 ITA NO.89 /CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 - 2010 B.K.PARIDA, SPS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, ASST.REGISTRAR, ITAT, CUTTACK 1. THE APPELLANT : BENUDHAR ROUT, AT/PO: PATIA, BHUBANESWAR 2. THE RESPONDENT: ITO, WARD - 2(1), BHUBANESWAR. 3. THE CIT(A) - 1, BHUBANESWAR. 4. CIT , BHUBANESWAR. 5. DR, ITAT, CUTTACK 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//