Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH
Before: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM
आदेश/ORDER
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee wherein the correctness of the order dated 02.04.2019 of CIT(A)-1 Chandigarh pertaining to 2013-14 assessment year is assailed on the following grounds :
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 that 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, the 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 made 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 any 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, the 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 unvouched even when the expenses had genuinely been paid and mostly through banking channel. 4. That the appellant craves leave for any addition, deletion or amendment in the grounds of appeal on or before the disposal of the same.
The ld. AR inviting attention to the grounds raised and the
impugned order submitted that in the present appeal the limited
prayer of the assessee is for restoring the issue back for a proper
consideration on merits.
Inviting attention to Ground No. 2 & 3 and paras 5.2 and
7.2 respectively. Addressing the first issue, it was submitted
that Paper Book page 25 and 39 to 44 would show that even
before the AO, the assessee had submitted that disallowance
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 that the in-
house vouched expenses of gardener, kitchen staff etc. were
unsigned by the AR, this was the only objection. It 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 shortcoming was lack
of A.R’s 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
The ld. Sr.DR considering the prayer and record had no
objection to the request for remand.
The parties were required to address as to which authority
the remand should be made. Both the parties considering the
record agreed for a remand back to AO who can look into the
necessary record.
I have heard the submissions and perused the material 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 and examined the reply of the assessee. Brief fact of the case is 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 assessee. 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 Rs. 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 demonstrated that he has raised this issue before the AO 6ur\ng assessment proceedings. 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 Officer and examined the reply of the assessee. The ld. AO has examined the books of accounts and bill and vouchers and found that the appellant 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 been 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 No.4 is dismissed. (emphasis supplied)
ITA 888/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2013-14 Page 4 of 5
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 the 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 are initiated separately on this account."
Accordingly, in the light of the prayer of the parties before
the Bench on facts as they stand, the impugned order 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 after 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 pronounced at the
ITA 888/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2013-14 Page 5 of 5
time of virtual hearing itself in the presence of the parties via
Webex.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for
statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 05.04.2021.
Sd/-
(�दवा �संह ) (DIVA SINGH) �या�यक सद�य/Judicial Member
“पूनम” आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�/ CIT 4. आयकर आयु� (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar `