GIRI POLISETTY,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-16(4), HYDERABAD

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “A-SMC”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.298/Hyd/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Giri Polisetty vs. ITO, Hyderabad. Ward – 16(4), Hyderabad. PAN – AHGPP4748K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri T. Rajendra Prasad Smt. B.K. Vishnu Priya Revenue by : Date of hearing : 12-07-2018 Date of pronouncement : 18-07-2018 ORDER PER SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, AM: This is an appeal by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-4, Hyderabad dated 27.11.2017. 2. Briefly stated facts are that Assessee, an individual is doing business and also has salary and house property incomes. Assessee filed return of income admitting total income of Rs. 94,470/- and the assessment has been completed assessing the income at Rs. 12,49,470/-. As A.O noticed that Assessee has claimed TDS on an amount of Rs. 9,45,000/- received from M/s Marble Estate (India) Pvt. Ltd., which was not disclosed in the return filed, he has initiated proceedings u/s 147 of the IT Act after end of the four year period and obtained approval of the Pr. CIT as per the provision of the Act. In the reassessment proceedings on the reason that no information has been

2 ITA No. 298/Hyd/2018 Shri. Giri Polisetty, Hyd. filed by Assessee, A.O has brought the amount of Rs. 9,45,000/- to tax. 3. Before the Ld. CIT(A), Assessee contested the issue of reopening as well as bringing to tax an amount of Rs. 9,45,000/-. It was the submission that Assessee has received the amount in the proprietary concern of M/s G.P Infotainment towards advertisement and the same was paid to Zee News Ltd., for telecasting the advertisement. It was submitted that the total expenditure on advertisement was of Rs. 10,02,455/-, which resulted in a loss of Rs. 57,477/-. As the activity resulted in loss, the Assessee did not offer the same in the return. It was claimed that corresponding expenditure should be allowed. Ld. CIT(A) however, dismissed the contentions by stating as under:

“6.3 I have carefully considered the assessment order, facts of the case and submissions of the appellant. The submissions of the appellant are not accepted since the amount was received and not shown in the accounts. Therefore, the expenditure also not offered and hence, I am in agreement with the Assessing Officer and the addition made by the Assessing Officer is hereby confirmed”. 4. It was the contention of the Ld. Counsel that assessment has been completed u/s 143(3) of the IT Act and Assessee has claimed the TDS amount as it was reflected in 26AS form. Since, the activity resulted in loss assessee did not claim loss as such. However, it was submitted that as the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the IT Act, the reopening of the assessment after four years should satisfy the conditions that Assessee has not furnished full and true disclosure of the information.

3 ITA No. 298/Hyd/2018 Shri. Giri Polisetty, Hyd. Ld. Counsel relied on the various case law in support of the contentions. 5. After considering the rival contentions, I am of the opinion that reopening of the assessment is valid for simple reason that Assessee has not disclosed the entire business of M/s G.P Infotainment in the return of income as admitted before Ld. CIT(A). Since there is a failure on the part of Assessee in showing the transactions pertaining to the advertisement business, I am of the opinion that A.O has satisfied the conditions prescribed under Sec. 147 of the IT Act, particularly, the proviso to Sec. 147 of the Act. In view of that, the contentions on reopening of assessment by assessee and the grounds pertaining to this are rejected. 6. Coming to the issue of bring to tax the amount of Rs. 9,45,000/-, it was the contention that Assessee has received an amount towards advertisement and has paid the same to Zee News Ltd. In support, Assessee has filed the Profit and Loss account in the name of the M/s G.P Infotainment supported by various ledger copies, bank statements and invoices from Zee News Ltd., This information even though has been furnished before the CIT(A), the same were not subjected to verification by the A.O. In the interest of justice I am of the view that this entire receipt and expenditure as claimed by Assessee require proper verification by A.O. Therefore, A.O is directed to examine the receipts and payments to Zee News and correlate the payments with the business activity and, if so found correct, allow the expenditure to the extent of

4 ITA No. 298/Hyd/2018 Shri. Giri Polisetty, Hyd. the receipt, as the loss if any cannot be allowed in reopened assessment as the same was not claimed. Subject to the above observation, A.O is directed to examine the issue afresh after giving due opportunity to Assessee. In the result, grounds are considered allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, appeal filed by Assessee is considered partly allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court on 18th July, 2018.

Sd/- (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated 18th July, 2018. KRK 1) Giri P. C/o Rajendra Prasad T. FCA, Flat No. 501, Pent House, Dhrumataru Jasmine Apartments, 2-2-3/228, DCC Projects, Prasanth Nagar, Shivam Raoad, Hyderabad – 44. 2) ITO, Ward – 16(4) Hyderabad. 3) CIT(A) -4, Hyderabad. 4) The Addl. CIT, Range-16, Hyderabad. 5) The Departmental Representative, I.T.A.T., Hyderabad. 6) Guard File