C.I.T. UDAIPUR vs. AMOL AGARWAL

Judgment 21/11/2016 This appeal is preferred to question correctness of order dated 25.9.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur in Income Tax Appeal No.413 /JU/2014. By the order impugned, learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal affirmed the order dated 02.05.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal). The submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that the Commissioner of Income Tax as well as the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal failed to appreciate that the amount of Rs.1,05,31,837/- was (2 of 4) (ITA No.46-2015) added in the income of the assessee as no adequate details were given about the persons to whom the amount aforesaid was paid against wages. It is further submitted that both the appellate courts did not appreciate the fact that as per Section 69 C of the Income Tax Act,1961 the unexplained expenses is required to be added in the taxable income of the assessee. In the case in hand, a sum of Rs.15,22,979/- remain unexplained, but, that has been excluded from the taxable income of the assessee. On examination of the facts averred in the orders passed by the Assessing Officer Commissioner of Income Tax Tribunal we do not find any merit in any of the argument advanced. So far as the issue with regard to payment of wages is concerned, suffice, to mention that the Commissioner of Income Tax in detail discussed the same and arrived at a finding of fact that the sum of Rs.1,53,00,051/- was paid to the workmen. True it is, the vouchers produced by the assessee were not having complete details, but merely on that count it cannot be held that no such amount was paid. The vouchers were available on record and those were also having thumb impression of the persons to whom the amount was paid. Pertinent to (3 of 4) (ITA No.46-2015) notice that the workman to whom the wages were paid are involved in construction work. In totality, the findings arrived by the Commissioner of Income Tax and as affirmed by the Income Tax Appellant are pure findings of fact. The other issue addressed by learned counsel that both the appellate courts failed to appreciate that as per Section 69C of the Act of 1961 the unexplained amount was required to be added in the Income Tax of the assessee. We are having no doubt about the effect of the provisions of Section 69 C of the Act of 1961 but in the instant matter both the appellate courts have given a finding of fact that the amount in question was adequately explained by the assessee as such no justifiable reason exist to interfere with the order impugned. Learned counsel also made an effort to address on the point that the books of accounts were rightly rejected by the assessing authority, but the appellate courts failed to examine the issue. suffice to mention that this aspect of the matter has already been considered by this Court between the same parties in D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.59/2014. In light of the order aforesaid this issue too is having no merit.

(4 of 4) (ITA No.46-2015) The appeal, as such, involves no substantial question of law, hence, dismissed. (DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI)J. (GOVIND MATHUR)J. Anil Kumar Choudhary