Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC-2’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI H. S. SIDHU
PER H.S. SIDHU, JM ORDER This appeal is filed by assessee against the order dated 17.3.2015 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-13, New Delhi relating to Assessment Year 2009-10 on the following grounds:-
That the Assesse was doing the Business as trading of readymade garments at Budh Vihar Delhi-86 & He Filled lncornetax Return vide Acknowledgement no. 19891 on 31/03/10 declaring the income of Rs. 200920/- Form the Business.
2. That He Claimed deductions Rs.51600/- under Chapter VI A and after deduction he Net Income was shown Rs.- 149320/-
3. That During the above Year He Deposited cash Rs.- 1719160/-in his bank account.
That in the above year the assesse made sale of Rs.- 1839500/-during the F.Y.- 2008-2009 (A.Y.2009-2010).
5. That all the cash deposited in Bank account out of sale proceeds made by Him.
6. That the assesse filed his Income Tax Return U/S 44AF under the Income Tax Act. In his Return he show the following Amount in his Income Tax Return-
a. Sale -Rs, 1839500 b. Stock- Rs. 76240 c. Cash in Hand -Rs. 13500 d. Profit - Rs. 200920
That in the above Assessment Year -2009-2010.The Following Condition were applied for filling the return on U/S.44AF Income Tax Act. a. The Provisions of section 44AF applied to an assessee engaged in the Business of retail trade in any goods or merchandise, whose total turnover form the said business does not exceed Rs. 4000000/ in the previous year. b. The profit from business shall be demand to be 5% of total turnover of the assesses during the previous year or higher sum as may be declared by the assesses. c. The assesses is not required either to maintain books of account U/S. 44AF However, if the assesses claims that the profit from the business of retail trade is less than 5% of the total turnover in previous year, then, he is required to maintain books of accounts U/S.44AA(2) and also get the same audited U/S.44AB, irrespective of monetary limits of total turnover/Income, of that previous year (Vide section 441 F(5)) .
That the assesses fulfilled all the condition U/S. 44AF of the Income Tax Act. Because he shown his income more than 5% of the total turnover.
That the assesses deposited the same of Rs 1719160/ in the Bank account and he also made withdrawals of cash Rs.2291500/ during the above A.Y.2009-10 form the Bank.
That the assesses in a very old assesses and he is filled his Income Tax return Regularly.
That all assesses was trying to extend his Business That's why all the transaction of Cash Deposited & Made the Payment to Supplier in advance assesses had re invested his all past savings Capital.
That the assesses not received any notice from the department and the assessing officer without serving any notices pass the order and without seen the facts declared in the ITR U/S. 44AF.
Facts narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed by the Ld. A.R. of the assessee, hence, the same are not repeated here for the sake of convenience.
Notice of hearing was sent to both the parties and in response to the same none appeared on behalf of the Department, nor any application for adjournment has been filed by the Department.
Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the present case, I am of the considered view that no useful purpose would be served to serve the notice again and again to the Department, therefore, I am deciding this Appeal as Exparte qua Department, after hearing the Ld. AR of the assessee and perusing the records.
4. At the time of hearing, Ld. AR of the assessee has stated that assessee is having all the documentary evidence for substantiating his claim, but the Revenue authorities has not given the sufficient opportunity to the assessee for substantiating the claim before it. Ld. AR of the assessee further stated that AO has completed the assessment u/s. 143(3)/144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and made the addition. Similarly, the Ld. CIT(A) has upheld the addition made by the AO by holding that the assessee did not furnish any explanation during the assessment proceedings as well as appellate proceedings which is contrary to the facts and law. In fact the assessee has given the explanation with the documentary evidence for substantiating the claim, but the same has not been considered by the Revenue Authorities. He requested that the issue in dispute may be set aside to the file of the AO for fresh consideration and for substantiating the claim of the assessee. Ld. AR of the assessee also undertakes that assessee will fully cooperate in the assessment proceedings and will not take any unnecessary adjournment.
I have heard the Ld. AR of the assessee and considered the submissions made by him. I find considerable cogency in the contention raised by the Ld. AR that the assessee has given the explanation with the documentary evidences for substantiating the claim, but the same has not been considered by the Revenue Authorities which is not permissible under the law. Therefore, in the interest of justice, I set aside the issues in dispute to the file of the AO for fresh consideration, as per law, after considering all the documentary evidences. However, the assessee is directed to fully cooperate with the AO during the proceedings before him and not to take any unnecessary adjournment in the case and also produce all the necessary evidences before the AO to substantiate his claim.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 17/08/2016.