YAMI ASSOCIATES,RAJNANDGAON vs. I.T.O.-1, RAJNANDGAON

PDF · subscribers
ITA 127/BIL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 May 2018AY 2009-105 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to dismiss the appeal. The assessee's failure to produce necessary bills, vouchers, and evidence for business expenditure justified the confirmation of additions made by the AO.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against the CIT(A)'s order confirming additions to commission and travelling expenses was dismissed by the ITAT. The assessee failed to appear for hearings and provide supporting documents for the expenses.

What were the issues?

Whether disallowance of commission and travelling expenses is justified when the assessee fails to provide supporting evidence and attend appellate proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(7)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR

Before: SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA (AM) & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM)

For Respondent: Shri D.K. Jain (DR)
Hearing: 08/03/2018Pronounced: 25/05/2018

PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM This appeal has been filed by the assessee against order dated 05.06.2015 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Raipur, for the assessment year 2009-10, whereby the Ld. CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee against assessment order passed by the AO u/s 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’).

2.

The assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal on the following effective grounds:-

1.

“The Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming disallowance of Rs. 20,000/- out of commission expense account.

2.

Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming disallowance of Rs. 30,000 out of travelling expense account.”

3.

This case was fixed for hearing on 06.03.2018, however, on the request of both the parties the case was adjourned to the next day. On 07.03.2018 again on the request of the counsel for the assessee, hearing was adjourned to 08.03.2018. On 08.03.2018 when the case was called out for hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Even no application was received for adjournment. In view of the conduct of the assessee, we decided to dispose of the appeal on the basis of material on record after hearing the Departmental Representative (DR).

4.

Before us, the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) submitted that the assessee did not appear before the Ld. CIT (A) during the appellate proceedings despite service of notice. Hence, the Ld. CIT (A) has rightly confirmed the additions made by the AO. We have perused the orders passed by the authorities below, the Ld. CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal ex-parte on the basis of material on record. The relevant paras of the order of the Ld. CIT (A) are reproduced as under:-

“2.In the instant case, return of income filed for Rs. 41,120/- was assessed at Rs. 91,120/-. The additions made to the total income relate to disallowance of Rs. 20,000/- out of commission expenses of Rs. 46,07,172/- and disallowance of Rs. 30,000/- out of travelling expenses of Rs. 3,55,035/-. The reasons for disallowance are narrated in the order of assessment i.e. non-availability of proper bills and vouchers, cash payments, absence of proper evidence of service rendered by the commission agents, etc. CIT 73 ITR 634 (SC), Assam Pesticides & Agro Chemicals Agility Logistics P. Ltd. (2012) 19 taxman. Com 159/136 TT] (Ahd) 310, etc.

The appellant has paid commission of Rs. 46,07,172/- and incurred travelling expenses of Rs. 3,55,035/-. The necessary documents proving services rendered by the commission agents, tickets, conveyance and hotel bills etc. towards travelling expenses were not produced, neither before the AO nor before the undersigned inspite of the fact that sufficient opportunities were given at both the stages and in the given facts and circumstances of the case and the legal prepositions discussed above, the reasonable additions made out of such expenses are confirmed.

3.

In the result, the appeal is dismissed.”

5.

We find that the Ld. CIT (A) has decided the case after discussing the evidence on record and following the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, High Courts and the decision of different Benches of the ITAT. Since, the assessee has failed to produce the necessary bills and vouchers and further failed to establish that the expenses were laid out wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business, the Ld. CIT (A) has rightly dismissed the appeal of the assessee and confirmed the addition made by the AO. We accordingly uphold the order passed by the Ld. CIT (A) and dismiss the appeal of the assessee. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2009- 2010 is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 25th May, 2018. (N.K. BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Raipur, दिन ांक Dated: 25/05/2018

Alindra, PS आदेश प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. दिभ गीय प्रदिदनदि, आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण,Raipur / DR, ITAT, Raipur 6. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file.

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, सत्य दपि प्रदि //// उि/सहायक िंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →