Shri Venkateswara Traders, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

MA 148/CHNY/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6829 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 23-09-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 05-08-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: M SWAMINATHAN
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER .. M.P. NO. 148/MDS/2011 (IN I.T.A. NO. 521/MDS/11) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 SHRI VENKATESWARA TRADERS, NO.224, GOVINDAPPA NAICKEN STREET, CHENNAI 600 001. PAN : AACFS4984M (PETITIONER) V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE IX, CHENNAI 600 006. (RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : SHRI M. SWAMINATHAN RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SHAJI P. JACOB DATE OF HEARING : 16.09.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 23.09.2011 O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : VIDE THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION, GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAD PASSED ORDER EX PARTE THOUGH A LETTER REQUESTING ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED BY ITS COUNSEL. AS PER THE A SSESSEE, THE ORDER HAS TO BE RECALLED. M.P. NO. 148/MDS/11 2 2. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE COULD NOT ENTER APPEARANCE DUE TO UNAVOIDABLE CIRCU MSTANCES AND REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE COUNSELS FROM BOTH SIDES. THO UGH IT IS STATED BY LEARNED A.R. THAT A REQUEST FOR ADJOURNME NT WAS FILED, NO SUCH LETTER IS SEEN ON RECORD. IT IS TRUE THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAD DISPOSED THE APPEAL EX PARTE SINCE NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE. BUT, NEVERTHELESS, ASSESSEE HAD FILED A LETTER DATE D 28.4.2011 SIGNED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER IN WHICH IT HAD MADE THE FO LLOWING SUBMISSIONS:- THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE IX WAS OBJECTED BY US ON TWO GROUNDS THROUGH GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BY US AND SUBSEQUENT HEARINGS ON TWO GR OUNDS BEFORE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VIZ. 1. WE COULD NOT PRODUCE THE DETAILS OF SUNDRY CREDITORS AT THE TIME OF SURVEY BECAUSE ALL OF THEM WERE CULTIVATORS IN REMOTE VILLAGES OF TELENGANA AR E ASSESSING OFFICER. HOWEVER, CONFIRMATION AND RECEIPTS WERE OBTAINED AT THE TIME OF PAYMENT. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REJECTING OUR SUBMISSION WITH REGA RD TO THE SUNDRY CREDITORS. THE COPIES OF RECEIPTS AND DETAILS WERE SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. M.P. NO. 148/MDS/11 3 2. THE INCOME ARRIVED AT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WORKS OUT TO 56% OF THE TURNOVER WHICH IS NOT POSSIBLE AND HENCE REQUESTED THAT THE ADDITION OF ENTIRE RS.2600000/- MAY BE CANCELLED. WE HAD ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITION MADE TO THE STOCK DURING THE SURVEY WAS ALSO FIXED ARBITRARILY WITHOUT VERIFICATION OF STOCK. HOWEVER, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) IX HAD P ARTLY ALLOWED OUR APPEAL CONSIDERING HIGH PROFIT RATIO ON LY. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE SUBMIT THAT THERE IS NO REASON TO SET ASIDE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ORDER. 3. IT IS ONLY AFTER CONSIDERING SUCH SUBMISSIONS AN D CONSIDERING THE MERITS OF THE CASE, THE TRIBUNAL HAD GIVEN THE ORDER. THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) WAS SET ASIDE FOR A REASON THAT OR IGINAL ADDITION WAS MADE FOR UNEXPLAINED CREDIT BALANCE, AND LD. CIT(AP PEALS) ERRED IN SCALING DOWN THE ADDITION BY APPLYING A PROFIT RATE . WE ARE UNABLE TO FIND ANY MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL WHIC H IS APPARENT ON RECORD WARRANTING A RECALL OF THE ORDER. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. M.P. NO. 148/MDS/11 4 THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2011. SD/- SD/- (HARI OM MARATHA) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2011. KRI. COPY TO: (1) PETITIONER (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT(A) (4) CIT (5) D.R. (6) GUARD FILE