Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD&SHRI AMARJIT SINGH
PER AMARJIT SINGH - AM:
The appeal filed by the Assessee for A.Y. 2010-11, arise from order of the CIT(A)-XVI, Ahmedabad dated 25.08.2014, in proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”.
The fact in brief is that the assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act was passed on 01.03.2013. The AO has made various disallowance and total income was assessed at Rs. 76,11,303/- as against return of income of Rs. 22,00,500/- filed by the assessee.
Dhiman Vyas vs. DCIT] A.Y. 2010-11 2 3. Aggrieved assessee has filed before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
The assessee has raised seven issues in the ground appeal. During the course of appellate proceeding before us the Ld. Counsel has not pressed Ground No. 4 to 7 briefly disallowance of telephone expenses, vehicle expenses, depreciation of car and gift expenses. Therefore, the ground of appeal filed on above four issues stand dismissed. The remaining three ground of appeal to be adjudicated are on the following issues:
“(i) Discrepancy in contract receipt (ii) Unexplained cash credit of Rs. 8,00,000/- (iii) Disallowance out of labour expenses of Rs. 33,19,460/-.”
During the course of assessment the AO noticed that assessee has shown Rs. 6,53,44,578/- as contract receipt, however, as per Form No. 26AS the gross contract receipt was shown at Rs. 6,62,87,189/-. The AO has stated that assessee has neither furnished any detail now any reconciliation therefore, difference of Rs. 9,42,611/- including receipt of interest from Bank of India amounting to Rs. 52,914/- was added to the total income of the assessee. Regarding addition of Rs. 8,00,000/- under the head unexplained cash credit, the AO noticed that assessee has claimed an amount of Rs. 8,00,000/- as unexplained loan from Rathi Sir. The AO has disallowed the same as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act on the ground that assessee has failed to furnish complete details and explanation in support of her claim. In respect of disallowance out of labour expenses of Rs. 33,19,460/- the AO noticed that assessee has paid Rs. 4,24,41,725/- towards labour expense without deduction of tax and the assessee has not submitted supporting voucher in respect of incurring of labour expenses. Therefore, the AO has disallowed 10% of the labour expenses to the amount of Rs. 93,19,460/- and added to the total income of the assessee.
Dhiman Vyas vs. DCIT] A.Y. 2010-11 3 5. The Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
During the course of appellate proceeding before us the Ld. Counsel has furnished Paper Book containing 158 pages consisting of information and document filed before the AO and Ld. CIT(A) during the course of assessment proceeding and appellate proceeding. The Ld. Counsel has contended that AO has not considered the document and information furnished during the course of assessment proceeding and Ld. CIT(A) has sustained the disallowance without any valid reason.
On the other hand, the Ld. DR has relied on the order of the lower authorities.
We have heard both the sides and perused the material on record. In respect of discrepancy in contract receipt notice by the AO the Ld. Counsel has referred Page No. 56 of the Paper Book comprising a letter dated 31.12.2012 filed before the AO towards reconciliation of differences observed in the contract receipt. It is contended that both the authorities have not considered the detail and document as referred above before adding and confirming the disallowance. Regarding addition of unexplained cash credit of Rs. 8,00,000/- the Ld. Counsel has referred documents placed at Page No. 136 to 141 of the Paper Book comprising copies of confirmation, copies of Pan No. copies of return of income, copies of balance sheet and copies of bank statement etc. of the lender available before the AO and Ld. CIT(A) however the same were not considered. Regarding third addition on disallowance of labour expenses of Rs. 33,19,460/- the Ld. Counsel has referred Page No. 61 to 85 of the Paper Book comprising detail and copies of document ledger account etc. in support of incurring of labour expenses.
In the light of the above facts and circumstances the assessee has furnished specific detail along with copies of documents as supporting evidences to reconcile the discrepancy observed by the AO in respect of contract receipt. It is also Dhiman Vyas vs. DCIT] A.Y. 2010-11 4 noticed that assessee has also furnished document of lender such as PAN card, return of income, balance confirmation, bank statement etc. to proof the genuineness of unexplained loan of Rs. 8,00,000/-. The assessee has also furnished various detail and information in respect of claim of labour expenses and was also brought to the notice of the AO that TDS provision was not applicable to the labour payments. After considering the aforesaid fact it is noticed that AO has not specifically considered the above cited specific detail and information furnished by the assessee during the course of assessment proceeding. It is also noticed that Ld. CIT(A) has retreated the reason of disallowance given by the AO without considering the specific detail and information provided by the assessee during the course of assessment and appellate proceeding. In view of the above facts, we observe that the Ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the case as prescribed in the provision of Sec. 250(6) of the Act which provide that while disposing the appeal the CIT(A) shall state the points for determination the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. Considering the above we are of the view that it will be appropriate to restore this case to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudicating the aforesaid three ground of appeal of the assessee a fresh after verification and examination of the supporting document/information provided by the assessee. Therefore, appeal of the assessee is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudicating a fresh as stated above after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
This Order pronounced in Open Court on 16/09/2019