Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI & SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR
आदेश / O R D E R PER G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
The appeal is field by the assessee against the order of The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, dated 25.02.2015 in for the assessment year 2008-09 passed u/s.143(3) rws 153A and 250 of the Income Tax Act (in short ‘’the Act’’).
ITA No. 1310/Mds/2015 :- 2 -:
The assessee has raised grounds of appeal before the Tribunal in respect of addition of adhayam receipts of �3,40,200/- which is included in income of the assessee and other being capital introduction of �2 lakhs in M/s.Sqny Granites out of adhayam receipts.
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an 3.
‘individual’ and partner of M/s. Sony group concerns. Search operation u/s.132 of the Act was conducted in M/s. Sony Fireworks Private Limited main group concern at Sivakasi on 21.10.2008 and also residential premises of the founder of group. Simultaneously, Income Tax Department made a survey u/s.133A in the business premises and factories and seized books of accounts, documents and other incriminating material. A notice u/s.153C read with section 153A(a) dated 30.11.2009 was issued to the assessee to file a return of income within stipulated time.
The assessee filed e-return on 19.09.2010 with income of 4.
�6,66,320/-. In the assessment proceedings questionnaire was issued seeking explanations for information of the seized material, assets, bank accounts, movable and immovable assets owned by the assessee. The ld. AR appeared alongwith bank accounts statements and filed explanations in respect of entries found in books of account and also submitted evidences to support the case. The ld. Assessing
ITA No. 1310/Mds/2015 :- 3 -:
Officer considering the submissions on record, and examined the books of accounts made assessment by adding a sum of �17,86,690/- to returned income which includes adayam receipts and capital introduced in M/s. Sqny Granites and investment in property.
Aggrieved by the addition, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).
Before ld.CIT(A), the ld. AR argued that the assessee has 5. included adayam receipts in the revised return of income filed on 22.12.2010 were as the Assessing Officer has not considered the return and again taxed the adayam receipts and also capital introduced �2 lakhs in account of M/s.Sqny Granites. Inspite of explaining that capital amount of �2 lakhs is out of the adayam receipts available with the assessee as source for investment. The ld.CIT(A) has considered the submission of ld. AR and concluded that the Assessing Officer made assessment based on original return filed on 19.10.2010 and not revised return. Since, the revised return is not subject to appeal confirmed the addition of �3,40,000/- adayam receipts. Similarly, addition of �2,00,000/- introduced in capital account of M/s. Sqny Granites ignoring the factual position and held that assessee has not furnished any evidences for the source of capital and further, aggrieved by the order of ld.CIT(A) the assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal.
ITA No. 1310/Mds/2015 :- 4 -:
Before the Tribunal, the ld. Counsel has submitted that adayam receipts are taxed in the hands of the assessee in the revised return which the Assessing Officer has overlooked and made addition without verifying the revised return of income and requested the Tribunal to delete the addition of adayam receipts as it suffered double taxation and referred to copies of original return and revised return alongwith profit and loss account and ledger copies of M/s. Sqny Granities in paper book. The ld.AR demonstrated before us that the assessee had offered adayam receipts of �3,40,200/- under the head ‘’business or profession’’, which is evident from the profit and loss account filed alongwith revised return and prayed the Tribunal to delete the addition. Further, ld.AR submitted that out of the source of adayam receipts, the capital contribution of �2 lakhs was made as investment in M/s. Sqny Granites referring the accounts copies of the M/s. Sqnl Granites and also written submissions containing profit and loss account, balance sheet of M/s. Sqny Granites for the year ending 31.03.2008 and relied on the decisions of the jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. K.S.M. Guruswamy Nadar & Sons 149 ITR 127 and CIT vs. V. Nellaiapan 214 ITR 465 considering submission and explanations, the ld. Authorised Representative pleaded for deletion of the both the additions by the Tribunal.
ITA No. 1310/Mds/2015 :- 5 -:
On the other hand, the ld. Departmental Representative relied on the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and submitted that information was not submitted before the Assessing Officer or in the appellate proceedings. Hence, the appeal of the assessee is to be dismissed.
After hearing the submissions of both parties, material on record and also lower authorities orders. The ld.AR submitted that income of adayam receipts considered in the revised return at page no.22 of paper book which proves that adayam receipts are subject to taxation and the Assessing Officer has relied on the original e-return instead of revised return filed during the assessment proceeding on 22.12.2010 and ld.CIT(A) also confirmed the same. Further, the ld.AR explained that source of �2,00,000/- of investment in M/s. Sqny Granites is genuine and is reflected in the balance sheet of M/s. Sqny Granites filed alongwith written submission before the Tribunal. It is clear that the assessee has offered income of adayam receipts in the revised return and also explained the source of investment of �2,00,000/- in M/s. Sqny Granites as capital contribution which is evident from the submission filed in the hearing proceedings but as pointed out by the ld. Departmental Representative that this information was not brought to the knowledge at the time of assessment before the Assessing Officer and therefore to test the ITA No. 1310/Mds/2015 :- 6 -:
genuinenity and correctness of the claim, the same has to be examined. We are of the opinion that the matter requires further enquiry at the end of Assessing Officer and the issue in dispute is remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer to verify the material submitted and pass fresh order accordingly. The Assessing Officer is directed to provide adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee and decide the issue afresh.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA 9. No.1310/Mds/2015 is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced on Friday, the 16th day of October, 2015, at Chennai.