Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara
Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sri Sachin Kumar Singh…………………..….……...........…………..……………….…...……..…….……...Appellant C/o Rajesh Mohan & Associates Unit No. 18 5th Floor Bagati House 34, Ganesh Chandra Avenue Kolkata – 700 013 [PAN : BGXPS 9231 H] Vs. Income Tax Officer-48(3), Kolkata……...........................................................…….…..............Respondent Appearances by: Shri Sunil Surana, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri C.J. Singh, JCIT Sr. D/R. appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : January 23rd , 2019 Date of pronouncing the order : March 15th, 2019 ORDER Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, AM :- This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 14, Kolkata, (hereinafter the ‘Ld. CIT(A)’), dt. 31/05/2017, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’), relating to Assessment Year 2012-13.
The assessee is an individual. He filed his return of income on 30/09/2012 declaring income of Rs.2,30,490/-. The Assessing Officer at para 2 page 5 of his order concluded as follows:- “In view of the foregoing discussion it may be reasonable concluded that the assessee has allowed his bank accounts to utilised by the entry operators in which such operators parked undisclosed funds only to obtains payments from the assessee to give a colour of genuineness of such entries given to other corporate and non-corporate entities and for such services the assessee as charged commission . The commission income is estimated to have peen 2% of the entry deposits made into his bank account. Therefore, the income of the assessee from his business of accommodation entries is estimated at 2% of Rs.38,88,59,998/- being for Rs. 77,77,200/-.” 2.1. On appeal the ld. CIT(A) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. He held that the assessee has not provided any evidence in support of his claim that the commission Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sri Sachin Kumar Singh estimated at 2% of the deposits made is excessive. At the last para of page 3 of his order, he held as follows:- “During appeal, the appellant has once again not been able to produce any supporting material in support of his ground of appeal
, but to the take the plea that the AO had committed an error in estimating the income at 2%. In view of the fact that the appellant has produced no evidence to show that the findings of the AO are erroneous, and in view of the fact that the appellant himself, as mentioned in his ground itself, had accepted that he is an entry provider working for a commission and that similar entry operators have declared their commission to much lower than 2%, in their depositions made before the Investigation Wing of the Department. I cannot find any material to differ from the findings of the AO, and the same stand confirmed”
3. Aggrieved the assessee is before us.
4. The ld. Counsel for the assessee relies on the decision of the Kolkata ‘A’ Bench of the Tribunal in Assessment Year 2010-11; Jaswant Singh vs. ITO; order dt. 14/09/2018, for the proposition that in such cases commission at 0.1% needs to be computed as income of the assessee. 4.1. The ld. D/R, opposed these contentions but was not in a position to place on record any case law or precedent to controvert the case law cited by the assessee.
5. We have heard rival contentions. On careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, perusal of the papers on record, orders of the authorities below as well as case law cited, we hold as follows:-
6. The assessee has relied on the order of this Bench in the case of Jaswant Singh (supra).Keeping in view the precedents set by this Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Jaswant Singh (supra), and the facts and circumstances of the case we direct the Assessing Officer to estimate the income at 0.5% of the deposits as in our view, this would meet the ends of justice.
7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part. Kolkata, the 15th day of March, 2019. Sd/- Sd/- [S.S. Godara] [J. Sudhakar Reddy] Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated : 15.03.2019 {SC SPS} Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sri Sachin Kumar Singh Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. Sri Sachin Kumar Singh C/o Rajesh Mohan & Associates Unit No. 18 5th Floor Bagati House 34, Ganesh Chandra Avenue Kolkata – 700 013
2. Income Tax Officer-48(3), Kolkata 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata.