The ITO, Ward-1(4),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT v. M/s. Sun Secure Incorporation,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

ITA 197/RJT/2012 | 2008-2009
Pronouncement Date: 10-07-2013 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 19724914 RSA 2012
Assessee PAN ABJFS2545Q
Bench Rajkot
Appeal Number ITA 197/RJT/2012
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 21 day(s)
Appellant The ITO, Ward-1(4),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT
Respondent M/s. Sun Secure Incorporation,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 10-07-2013
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 10-07-2013
Date Of Final Hearing 14-06-2013
Next Hearing Date 14-06-2013
Assessment Year 2008-2009
Appeal Filed On 19-04-2012
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBULAL: RAJKOT BENCH: RAJKOT BEFORE SHRI T K SHARMA JM AND SHRI D K SRIVASTAVA AM ITA NO. 88 /RJ T/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 8 - 0 9 M/S SUN SECURE INCORPORATION JALARAM ARCADE VIRANI CHOWK VIDHYANAGAR MAIN ROAD RAJKOT P AN: AB JFS 2545 Q V. ITO WARD 1( 4 ) RAJKOT ITA NO. 19 7/RJT/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008 - 09 ITO WARD 1(4) RAJKOT V. M/S SUN SECURE INCORPORATION DATE OF HEARING : 14 .0 6 .2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10 .0 7 .2013 ASSESSEE BY : SHRI D M RINDANI F CA REVENUE BY : SHRI K C MATHEWS SR. DR ORDER D. K. SRIVASTAVA : A PPEAL FILED BY BOTH THE PARTIES IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) RAJKOT ON 02 . 0 1 .20 1 2 . BEING CROSS APPEALS THEY ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY A C ONSOLIDATED ORDER. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS FIRM. IT IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF PROVIDING JOB PLACEMENT SERVICES. IT FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 26.03.2009 DECLARI NG TOTAL INCOME AT RS.81 300/ - AS AGAINST WHICH ITS TOTAL INCOME HAS BEEN ASSESSED BY THE AS SESSING OFFICER AT RS. 19 00 104/ - U/S 143(3) OF THE I - T ACT AFTER ADDING (I) RS.11 30 668/ - ON ACCOUNT OF SHORT RECEIPTS DISCLOSED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME; (II) RS.6 16 888/ - ON ACCOUNT OF FICTITIOUS LIABILITIES SHOWN IN THE BALANCE - SHEET; AND (III) RS.71 248/ - ON ACCOUNT OF COMMISSION RECEIVED ON TATA AIG LIFE INSURANCE CO. ON APPEAL THE LD CIT(A) PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL AGAINST THOSE ADDITIONS WHICH HAVE BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE LD CIT(A) WHILE THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THOSE ADDITIONS WHICH HAVE BEEN DELETED OR RE DUCED BY THE L D . CIT(A). ITA NO. 19 7/RJT/2012: AY 2008 - 09 : APPEAL BY THE REVENUE 3. GROUND NO.1 TAKEN BY THE REVENUE READS AS UNDER: - THE LEARNED CIT(A) - I HAS ER RED IN LAW AND ON FACT OF THE CASE IN RESTRICTING THE ADDITION OF RS.11 30 668/ - TO RS.6 16 888/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF SHORT RECEIPT. 2 ITA NO.88 & 127 - RJT - 2012 SUN SECURE INCORPORATON 4. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE H AD SHOWN GROSS RECEIPTS AMOUNTING TO RS.8 65 024/ - IN ITS PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT AS PER THE DETAILS GIVEN IN PARAGRAPH 4 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. HE ALSO PERUSED THE TDS CERTIFICATES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND NOTICED THAT THE TOTAL AMOUNT RECEIVED AS PER T HE TDS CERTIFICATES WAS RS.19 34 887/ - . ON BEING CONFRONTED BY THE AO T HE ASSESSEE COULD NOT SATISFACTORILY RECONCILE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE AMOUNT OF GROSS RECEIPTS SHOWN BY IT IN THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT AND THE AMOUNT ACTUALLY RECEIVED AS PER THE TDS CERTIFICATES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER THEREFORE ADDED A SUM OF RS.11 30 668/ - WITH THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS: - 6. THUS FROM THE ABOVE REPLY IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ACCEPTED THE DISCREPANCY TO THE EXTENT OF RS.2 12 079/ - . HOWEVER FOR THE REMAINING AMOUNT THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT IT HAD NOT DONE ANY ACTIVITIES ON BEHALF OF THE ABOVE PARTIES HENCE IT WAS SHOWN AS LIABILITY. INFORMATION U/S 133(6) OF THE IT ACT 1961 WAS CALLED FOR FROM THE ABOVE COMPANIES IN ORDER TO VERIFY THE CLAIM OF T HE ASSESSEE WHETHER ANY ACTIVITY WAS DONE OR NOT? IN RESPONSE THESE COMPANIES REPLIED AND THEIR REPLIES HAVE BEEN PLACED ON RECORD. IT SHALL BE IMPORTANT TO ANALYZE AND DISCUSS THE GIST OF THESE REPLIES AS IT HAD DIRECT BEARING ON THE ISSUE: A) AS PER A NNEXURE A TO ITS REPLY DATED 9.12.2010 ICICI PRUDENTIAL LIFE INS. CO. STATED THAT SUN SECURE WAS DOING THE WORK OF STAFF RECRUITMENT AND SUN SECURE WAS PAID AN AMOUNT OF RS.2 17 182/ - ON VARIOUS DATES AGAINST THE WORK OF STAFF RECRUITMENT DONE BY IT. B ) VIDE REPLY DATED 21.12.2010 BHARTI AXA LFE INS. CO. STATED THAT SUN SECURE WAS DOING AS RECRUITMENT CONSULTANT AND NATURE OF PAYMENT MADE IN FY 2007 - 08 WAS TOWARDS RECRUITMENT CONSULTANCY FEES AGAINST THE WORK OF STAFF RECRUITMENT DONE BY IT. BHARTI AX A SPECIFICALLY STATED THAT PAYMENT MADE TO SUN SECURE WAS IN NATURE OF 3 ITA NO.88 & 127 - RJT - 2012 SUN SECURE INCORPORATON INCOME AND IN THE ENCLOSURE OF REPLY BHARTI AXA ENCLOSED THE DETAILS OF BILLS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AND PAYMENTS MADE THEREOF. C) VIDE REPLY DATED 10.12.2010 ING VYASYA LIFE INS. CO . STATED THAT SUN SECURE WAS DOING THE WORK OF MANPOWER RECRUITMENT AND NATURE OF PAYMENT MADE IN FY 2007 - 08 WAS TOWARDS MANPOWER RECRUITMENT FEES AGAINST THE WORK OF STAFF RECRUITMENT DONE BY IT. ING VYASYA SPECIFICALLY STATED THAT PAYMENT MADE TO SUN SE CURE WAS IN NATURE OF INCOME BASED ON THE SERVICES PROVIDED BY IT AND ALSO THE PAYMENT WAS AGAINST THE INVOICE RAISED BY SUN SECURE. 6.1 LIKE WISE OTHER COMPANIES ALSO REPLIED AND ENCLOSED PHOTOCOPIES OF TDS CERTIFICATES WHEREIN THE NATURE OF PAYMENT MA DE TO THE ASSESSEE IS SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED AS PAYMENT FOR TECHNICAL/PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. THUS FROM THE ABOVE FINDING AND CONFIRMATIONS IN WRITING FROM THE ABOVE COMPANIES IT IS CLEAR THAT THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IT HAD NOT DONE ANY ACTIVITY ON BEHALF OF THE ABOVE COMPANY IS NOT CORRECT. THEREFORE THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE IS REJECTED AND AN AMOUNT OF RS.11 30 668/ - IS ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME. PENALTY PROCEEDING U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE IT ACT ARE INITIATED FOR FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULA RS OF INCOME AND FOR CONCEALMENT OF INCOME. (IN REPLY TO LETTER U/S 133(6) ICICI PRUDENTIAL CONFIRMED THAT IT HAD MADE PAYMENT OF RS.2 17 182/ - WHICH IS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE AT RS.1 56 344/ - RESULTING INTO FURTHER DISCREPANCY OF RS.60 805/ - THUS TOTA L ADDITION IS WORKED OUT AT RS.10 69 863 + RS.60 805/ - = RS.11 30 668) . 5. ON APPEAL THE LD CIT(A) HAS RESTRICTED THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF RS.6 16 888/ - AS AGAINST RS.11 30 668/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS: - 3. 2 I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE A.O. IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE AR OF THE APPELLANT. IT IS NOTICED THAT THE APPELLANT HAS RECEIVED TOTAL RECEIPT OF RS.19 34 887/ - AS MENTIONED IN PARA. 5.1 OF THE ASSESSMENT OR DER OUT OF WHICH PAYMENT OF 4 ITA NO.88 & 127 - RJT - 2012 SUN SECURE INCORPORATON RS.4 65 070/ - WAS RECEIVED IN THE CAPACITY OF PROPRIETOR BEARING PROP. SHRI BIRENBHAI NANALAL KANERIA AND RS.8 65 024/ - WAS RECEIVED IN THE HANDS OF APPELLANT FIRM AND RS.6 16 888/ - IS SHOWN BY THE APPELLANT FIRM AS OUTSTAND ING AS RECEIVABLE (THE TOTAL OF THE SAME COMES TO RS.19 46 982 = 4 6 5 070+8 65 024+6 16 888). HENCE THE TOTAL RECEIPT TO THE EXTENT OF RS.19 46 982/ - IS FOUND TO BE RECONCILED BY THE APPELLANT FIRM. AS REGARDS TO PAYMENT OF RS.4 65 070 IT WAS STATED BY T HE APPELLANT THAT THE FIRM IS CONVERTED FROM PROPRIETARY CONCERN TO PARTNER FIRM & ABOVE RECEIPT ARE DISCLOSED IN THE HANDS OF PROPRIETOR SHRI BIRENBHAI NANALAL KANERIA. HENCE AMOUNT OF RS.4 65 070/ - IS HELD NOT TO BE ADDED IN THE HANDS OF APPELLANT FIRM. HOWEVER APPELLANTS CLAIM REGARDING INCOME OF RS.6 16 888/ - AS N O T BELONGING TO CURRENT YEAR BUT SHOWN AS RECEIVABLE IN B/S OF CURRENT YEAR IS REQUIRED TO BE PROVED. DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS IT WAS EXPLAINED BY THE APPELLANT THAT LUMP S UM PAYMENT MADE BY THE CONCERNS TO THE APPELLANT FIRM AND AFTER COMPLETION OF WORK AND AT THE YEAR END THE APPELLANT FIRM HAS SEND THE BILLS TO THE VARIOUS CONCERNS AND THE BALANCE AMOUNT WHICH IS RECEIVED AS ADVANCE IS SHOWN IN BALANCE AS A LIABILITY AN D TOTAL CLAIM OF THE REFUND MAD E BY THE APPELLANT BECAUSE THE INSTITUTION HAS MADE TDS ON THE BILL AMOUNT. DURING THE YEAR YOUR APPELLANT FIRM HAS CREDITED RS.8 65 024/ - IN THE P&L ACCOUNT AND REMAINING AMOUNT SHOWN IN BALANCE SHEET AS A LIABILITY. IN THE NEXT YEAR THE BALANCE AMOUNT IS GIVEN THE TREATMENT ACCORDINGLY. APPELLANT MAY BE ADOPTING THIS AS REGULAR METHOD OF ACCOUNTING BUT STILL HE IS REQUIRED TO PROVE THAT SO MUCH PART OF INCOME HAS NOT ACCRUED OR ARISEN AS INCOME DURING THE ACCOUNTING YEAR IN QUESTION BUT IT BELONGS TO NEXT YEAR. IT MAY BE A CASE THAT INCOME RECEIVABLE SHOWN IN B/S IS OFFERED FOR TAXATION IN NEXT YEAR & IT IS CONTESTED THAT RATE OF TAX BEING SAME IN BOTH THE YEARS NO ADVERSE INFERENCE SHOULD BE DRAWN HOWEVER SUCH PROPOSITION DOES NOT HOLD GOOD AS SECTION 4 OF THE ACT REQUIRES TO TAX THE CORRECT INCOME IN CORRECT ACCOUNTING YEAR AND NO DEVIATION CAN ALLOWED. WHEN APPELLANT HAS CLAIMED TDS THE BURDEN LIES ON HIM TO SHOWN THE CORRESPONDING INCOME IN RETURN OF INCOME. IF APPELLAN T FAILS TO DO SO LIKE IN 5 ITA NO.88 & 127 - RJT - 2012 SUN SECURE INCORPORATON THIS CASE WHOLE OF INCOME IS CHARGEABLE TO TAX IN CURRENT YEAR & NO CONSIDERATION CAN BE GIVEN FOR OUTSTANDING RECEIVABLES SHOWN IN B/S. IT MAY BE MENTIONED FOR CLARITY THAT AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 199 OF THE IT ACT CRE DIT FOR TDS CAN BE GIVEN ONLY IF CORRESPONDING INCOME ON WHICH TDS HAS BEEN MADE IS OFFERED FOR TAXATION IN THE YEAR OF CLAIM OF TDS MADE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. I N PRESENT CASE AS DISCUSSED ABOVE THE APPELLANT HAS FAILED TO PROVE THAT INCOME OF RS.6 16 888 IS NOT BELONGING TO CURRENT YEAR BUT IT PERTAINS TO NEXT YEAR. MOREOVER TDS MADE ON ABOVE INCOME OF RS.6 16 888 HAS BEEN CLAIMED IN CURRENT YEAR. AFTER OVERALL APPRAISAL OF FACTS IT IS HELD THAT INCOME OF RS.6 16 888 PERTAINS TO CURRENT YEAR & AO HAS R IGHTLY ADDED THE SAME TO THIS YEAR. ACCORDINGLY THE ADDITION OF RS.11 30 668/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS CONFIRMED TO THE EXTENT OF RS.6 16 888/ - . APPELLANT GETS RELIEF OF RS. 5 13 780/ - . THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 6. AGGRIEVED BY THE AFORESAID ORDER THE REVENUE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL THE LD DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE RELIED UPON THE FINDINGS RECORDED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TOTAL REC EIPTS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT AND THE AMOUNT OF TOTAL RECEIPTS REFLECTED IN THE TDS CERTIFICATES AS ADDED BY THE AO OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A). IN SUPPORT OF HIS SUBMISSIONS HE RELIED UPON THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN SMT J RAMA V. CIT (2012) 344 ITR 608 (KARN) . 7. AT THE TIME OF HEARIN G THE LD AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE WAS SPECIFICALLY CALLED UPON TO STATE AS TO WHETHER THERE WAS ANY MATERIAL IN THE POSSESSION OF THE ASSESSEE TO SATISFACTORILY RECONCILE THE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE AMOUNT OF RECEIPTS SHOWN IN THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT AND THE AMOUNT OF RECEIPTS REFLECTED IN THE TDS CERTIFICATES . HE HOWEVER COULD NOT RECONCILE THE SAME. 8. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIE S AND CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THEIR SUBMISSIONS. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION REGARDING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE 6 ITA NO.88 & 127 - RJT - 2012 SUN SECURE INCORPORATON AMOUNT OF RECEIPTS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT AND THE AMOUNT OF RECEIPTS REFLECTED IN THE TDS CERTIFI CATES IT IS LIABLE TO BE TAXED AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO PLACE ANY MATERIAL BEFORE US THAT THE AFORESAID DIFFERENCE WAS REFLECTED BY IT IN ITS ACCOUNTS EVEN IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER THE ORDER PASS ED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THIS BEHALF DESERVES TO BE RESTORED AND IS ACCORDINGLY RESTORED. GROUND NO.1 TAKEN BY THE R EVENUE IS ALLOWED. 9. GROUND NO.2 TAKEN BY THE REVENUE READS AS UNDER: - THE LEARNED CIT(A) - I HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACT OF THE CASE IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.6 16 888/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON A/C OF FICTITIOUS LIABILITIES SHOWN IN BALANCE SHEET. 10. THE IMPUGNED ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS: - ADDITION ON ACCOU NT OF AMOUNTS SHOWN IN LIABILITY SIDE OF B/S: DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN AN AMOUNT OF RS.6 16 888/ - IN THE NAME OF VARIOUS COMPANIES IN THE LIABILITY SIDE OF THE BALANCE SHEET. VIDE THIS OFFICE ORDER SHEET ENTRY DATED 19.11.2010 THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FURNISH COMPLETE DETAILS SUCH AS CONTRA ACCOUNTS CONFIRMATION PAN ETC. IN RESPECT OF THIS AMOUNT SHOWN IN THE LIABILITY SIDE OF THE B/S. HOWEVER NO REPLY WAS RECEIVED. THEREFORE VIDE THI S OFFICE LETTER DATED 26.11.2010 THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED T SHOW CAUSE AS TO WHY THIS AMOUNT SHOULD NOT BE ADDED TO ITS TOTAL INCOME IN ABSENCE OF ANY DETAILS. IN RESPONSE VIDE REPLY DATED 30.11.2010 THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT IT HAD NOT DONE ANY WORK HEN CE THE SAID AMOUNTS WERE SHOWN IN THE LIABILITY. AS DISCUSSED AS LENGTH THE TYPE AND NATURE OF PAYMENT WAS CONFIRMED FROM THE ABOVE COMPANIES AND THEY HAVE CONFIRMED IN WRITING THAT THE PAYMENT MADE TO THE ASSESSEE WAS AGAINST BILLS RAISED BY THE ASSESSE E. THEREFORE IT IS CLEAR THAT THESE 7 ITA NO.88 & 127 - RJT - 2012 SUN SECURE INCORPORATON COMPANIES HAD NOT ADVANCED ANY AMOUNT OR HAD NOT GIVEN ANY LOAN TO THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS REQUIRED TO BE SHOWN IN THE LIABILITY SIDE OF THE B/S. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FINDING AN AMOUNT OF RS.6 16 888/ - IS ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. PENALTY PROCEEDING U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE IT ACT ARE INITIATED FOR FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME AND FOR CONCEALMENT OF INCOME. FROM THE PLAIN READING OF THE ABOVE TWO ADDITIONS ONE MIGHT GET A FEELING THAT TH ERE IS DUPLICATION IN ADDITION. HOWEVER I COULD LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT THE ON CLOSE PERUSAL OF THE CONTENTS OF ADDITIONS IT SHALL BE NOTICED THAT THE ADDITION OF RS.11 30 668/ - REPRESENTS THE AMOUNT OF SHORT RECEIPTS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH CONFIRMED B Y THE COMPANIES AS PAYMENT AGAINST BILLS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE WHEREAS ADDITION OF RS.6 16 888/ - IS FOR THE FICTITIOUS LIABILITIES SHOWN IN THE B/S. THUS THE HEADS OF BOTH THESE ADDITIONS ARE DIFFERENT THOUGH THERE MIGHT BE COMMON NAMES OF COMPANIES. 11. ON APPEAL THE LD CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE IMPUGNED ADDITION WITH THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS: - 4.2 I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE A.O. IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE AR OF THE APPELLANT. IT IS FOUND THAT THI S ISSUE IS COVERED BY THE DECISION GIVEN IN PARA 3.2 ABOVE WHERE THE ADDITION OF SAME HAS BEEN CONFIRMED IN THE HANDS OF APPELLANT DURING THE CURRENT YEAR THEREFORE NO SEPARATE ADDITION OF RS.6 16 888/ - IN RESPECT OF AMOUNT SHOWN IN THE LIABILITY SIDE IS REQUIRES TO BE MADE. ACCORDINGLY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.6 16 888/ - MADE TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE APPELLANT. THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS ALLOWED. 12. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR T HE ASSESSEE WAS SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED TO FURNISH THE DETAILS OF THE LIABILITIES WHICH HAVE BEEN HELD BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO BE FICTITIOUS. HE HOWEVER COULD NOT FURNISH ANY SUCH DETAILS. 8 ITA NO.88 & 127 - RJT - 2012 SUN SECURE INCORPORATON 13. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. THE IMPUGNED AMOUNT HAS BE EN SHOWN ON THE LIABILITIES SIDE OF THE BALANCE - SHEET. THE LD CIT(A) HAS GIVEN NO REASON TO SHOW THAT THE IMPUGNED LIABILITIES ARE GENUINE. HIS FINDINGS IN THIS BEHALF CANNOT THEREFORE BE SUSTAINED. NO MATERIAL HAS BEEN PLACED BEFORE US TO SHOW THAT THEY A RE GENUINE LIABILITIES OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED RELEVANT DETAILS EVEN BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE TO ESTABLISH THE GENUINENESS OF THE IMPUGNED LIABILITIES IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO QUASH THE FINDINGS REC ORDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THIS BEHALF . IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DESERVES TO BE CONFIRMED AND IS ACCORDINGLY CONFIRMED. GROUND NO.2 TAKEN BY THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED. 14. GROUND NO S . 3 AND 4 TAKEN BY THE REVENUE ARE GENERAL IN NATURE AND THEREFORE DO NOT REQUIRE ADJUDICATION. ITA NO. 88/RJT/2012: AY 2008 - 09 : APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE 15. GROUND NO.1 TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE READS AS UNDER: - THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - I RAJKOT HAS ERR ED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE EXTENT OF RS.6 16 888/ - ON ALLEGED GROUND OF SHORT RECEIPTS DISCLOSED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME IS UNWARRANTED UNJUSTIFIED AND BAD IN LAW. 16. WE HAVE ALREADY DEALT WITH THE ISSUE WHILE D EALING WITH THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. SINCE WE HAVE RESTORED THE ADDITION AMOUNTING TO RS.11 30 668/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS GROUND NO.1 DESERVES TO BE DISMISSED AND IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 17. GRO UND NO.2 TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE READS AS UNDER: - THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - I RAJKOT HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF RS.71 248/ - ON ACCOUNT OF COMMISSION RECEIPT FROM TATA AIG LIFE INSURANCE COMP ANY IS UNWARRANTED UNJUSTIFIED AND BAD IN LAW. 9 ITA NO.88 & 127 - RJT - 2012 SUN SECURE INCORPORATON 18. THE IMPUGNED ADDITION HA S BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS: - 8. ON PERUSAL OF THE RECORDS AS PER E - TDS DATA RS.71 248/ - IS SHOWN TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FROM TATA AIG L IFE INSURANCE CO. U/S 194 - J AS COMMISSION INCOME WHICH WAS NOT REFLECTED IN THE RECEIPTS OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE VIDE ORDER SHEET ENTRY DATED 19.11.2010 THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO CLARIFY THE MATTER. HOWEVER NO REPLY HAS BEEN RECEIVED TILL DATE. FURTH ER THE ASSESSEE VIDE SUBMISSION DATED 30.11.2010 REPLIED TO OTHER QUERIES RAISED VIDE ORDER SHEET ENTRY DATED 19.11.2010 HOWEVER HE PREFERRED TO REMAIN SILENT ON THIS ISSUE. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY CLARIFICATION EVEN TILL THE DATE OF FINALIZATION OF THIS ORDER. THEREFORE IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NO OBJECTION/CLARIFICATION IN RESPECT OF THE SAID DISCREPANCY. THEREFORE AN AMOUNT OF RS.71 248/ - IS ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME. PENALTY PROCEEDING U/S 271 (1)(C) OF THE IT ACT ARE INITIATED FOR FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME AND FOR CONCEALMENT OF INCOME. 19. ON APPEAL THE LD CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THIS BEHALF WITH THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS: - 5.2 I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE A.O. IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE AR OF THE APPELLANT. IT IS NOTICED BY THE AO THAT AS PER ASSESSMENT RECORD AS PER E - TDS DATA SHOWS RS.71 248/ - TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM TATA AIG LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY U/S.194 - J AS COMMISSION INCOME. IT IS NOTICE THAT THE APPELLANT FIRM HAS NOT SUBMITTED ANY EXPLANATION OR EVIDENCE IN THIS REGARD BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS OR BEFORE ME DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS FOR NOT DISCLOSING ABOVE RECEIPTS IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THEREFORE THE ADDITION OF RS.71 248/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS CONFIRMED IN ABSENCE OF ANY EXPLANATION OR EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THAT THE SAME IS ACCOUNTED FOR. ACCORDINGLY THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 10 ITA NO.88 & 127 - RJT - 2012 SUN SECURE INCORPORATON 20. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. THE LD AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT POINT OUT ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD CIT(A). HIS ORDER IN THIS BEHALF IS THEREFORE CONFIRMED. GROUND NO.2 TAKEN BY THE ASSESSE E IS ALSO DISMISSED. 21. IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED WHILE THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 10 . 0 7 . 201 3 SD/ - SD/ - (T. K. SHARMA) ( D. K. SRIVASTAVA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER RAJKOT: 10 .0 7 .2013 B T COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1 . APPELLANT M/S SUN SECURE INCORPORATION JALARAM ARCADE VIRANI CHOWK VIDHYANAGAR MAIN ROAD RAJKOT 2 . RESPONDENT - ITO WARD 1(4) RAJ KOT 3 . CONCERNED CIT - I RAJKOT 4 . CIT (A) - I RAJKOT 5 . DR ITAT RAJKOT 6 . GUARD FILE. BY ORDER TRUE COPY PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT RAJKOT