M/s Jamadar Travels, Bharuch v. The Dy.CIT.,Bharuch Circle,, Bharuch

ITA 2327/AHD/2009 | 2003-2004
Pronouncement Date: 04-10-2013 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 232720514 RSA 2009
Assessee PAN AABFJ9426G
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 2327/AHD/2009
Duration Of Justice 4 year(s) 2 month(s) 4 day(s)
Appellant M/s Jamadar Travels, Bharuch
Respondent The Dy.CIT.,Bharuch Circle,, Bharuch
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 04-10-2013
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 04-10-2013
Date Of Final Hearing 23-09-2013
Next Hearing Date 23-09-2013
Assessment Year 2003-2004
Appeal Filed On 31-07-2009
Judgment Text
ITA NO 2327/ AHD/2009 . A.Y. 2003- 04 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE SHRI MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT J.M. & SHRI ANIL C HATURVEDI A.M.) I.T. A. NO. 2327 /AHD/2009 (ASSESSMENT Y EAR: 2003-04) M/S. JAMADAR TRAVEL DANDIYA BAZAR B/H. POLICE CHOWKI BHARUCH. (APPELLANT) VS. THE D.C.I.T BHARUCH CICLE BHARUCH (RESPONDENT) PAN: AABFJ9426G APPELLANT BY : SHRI MEHUL. K. PATEL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P. L. KUREEL SR.D.R. ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 23-09-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04-10-2013 PER SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI A.M. 1. THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE OR DER OF CIT(A)-IV AHMEDABAD DATED 21.01.2009 FOR A.Y. 2003-04. 2. THE FACTS AS CULLED OUT FROM THE ORDER OF LOWER AUT HORITIES ARE AS UNDER. 3. ASSESSEE IS A FIRM DERIVING INCOME FROM TRANSPORT B USINESS ON COMMISSION BASIS. IT FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FO R A.Y. 2003-04 ON 29.10.2003 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 25 000/- THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND THEREAFTER THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAM ED UNDER SECTION ITA NO 2327/ AHD/2009 . A.Y. 2003- 04 2 143(3) VIDE ORDER DATED 23.02.2006 AND THE TOTAL IN COME WAS DETERMINED AT RS. 4 37 270/-. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF ASSESS ING OFFICER ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE CIT(A). CIT(A) VIDE ORDER DATED 21 ST JANUARY 2009 DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVE D BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US AND HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUND:- 1. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) HAS GR IEVOUSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 13 77 126/- MADE TOWARDS UNDISCLOSED INCOME IN RESPECT OF ALLEGED DIFFERENCE IN RECEIPTS SHOWN AND AS PER TDS CERTIFICATES. 2. THAT ON FACTS AND IN LAW IT OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN APPR ECIATED THAT THE DIFFERENCE HAS ARISEN ONLY ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENT ACCOUNTING TREA TMENT FOLLOWED BY THE PAYEE AND THE RECEIVER. 4. BOTH THE GROUNDS RAISED BY ASSESSEE ARE INTERCONNEC TED AND HENCE CONSIDERED TOGETHER. 5. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ASSESS ING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THERE WERE DISCREPANCIES IN RECEIPTS SHOWN IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE AND AS PER THE TDS CERTIFICATE ISSU ED TO ASSESSEE BY THE COMPANIES. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO RECONCILE THE TOTAL RECEIPTS WITH THE TDS CERTIFICATES. THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE A SSESSEE WAS NOT FOUND ACCEPTABLE TO THE A.O. HE NOTICED THE DIFFERE NCES IN THE RECEIPTS AS SHOWN IN THE TDS CERTIFICATE AND AS PER THE BOOKS O F ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE WAS TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 13 77 126/- (AS LISTED IN TABLE IN PAGE 2 OF THE ORDER). HE ALSO NOTICED THAT THOUGH THE ASS ESSEE HAD CLAIMED CREDIT FOR THE TDS OF ALL THE RECEIPTS IN THE YEAR UNDER C ONSIDERATION BUT HAD NOT ACCOUNTED FOR ENTIRE RECEIPTS AS PER TDS CERTIFICAT E. HE ALSO NOTICED THAT ON IDENTICAL FACTS IN A.Y. 2001-02 ADDITION WAS MAD E BY THE A.O. AND WAS CONFIRMED BY CIT(A). HE ACCORDINGLY CONSIDERED THE DIFFERENCE OF ITA NO 2327/ AHD/2009 . A.Y. 2003- 04 3 RS. 13 77 126/- BETWEEN THE RECEIPTS AS PER TDS CER TIFICATES AND THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS TO BE UNEXPLAINED/UNDISCLOSED INC OME OF THE ASSESSEE AND ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORD ER OF ASSESSING OFFICER ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE CIT(A). CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING AS UNDER:- 3. I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE CONTENTIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL AS WELL GONE THROUGH THE RECORDS. ON PERUSAL OF ASSESSMENT ORDE R IT HAS BEEN NOTICED THAT THERE WERE DISCREPANCIES IN THE GROSS RECEIPTS AS PER BOO K OF ACCOUNTS AND GROSS RECEIPTS WORKED OUT ON THE BASIS OF TDS CERTIFICATE ISSUED B Y VARIOUS COMPANIES. ADMITTEDLY THE APPELLANT IS FOLLOWING THE MERCANTILE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING. IT WAS CONTENDED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL THAT HIS CLIENT PROBABLY ENTERS THE BOOK TRANSACTION ON CASH BASIS. THE APPELLANT FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE REASONS FOR DIS CLOSING LESS RECEIPTS THAN MENTIONED IN THE TDS CERTIFICATES. EVEN DURING APPELLATE STA GE. LEARNED COUNSEL HAD GONE INTO THE PHILOSOPHY TDS PROVISIONS INSTEAD OF EXPLAINING ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE IN GROSS RECEIPTS. HENCE EVEN NOW AT THE APPELLATE STAGE THE APPELLANT HAS FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE IN GROSS RECEIPTS WORKED DOWN ON THE BASIS OF TDS CERTIFICATES. HENCE IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE APPELLANT HAS SHOWN LESSOR G ROSS CONTRACT RECEIPTS. HENCE THE CONTENTIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL CANNOT BE ACCEDED TO WHICH ARE HEREBY REJECTED. THE CASES RELIED UPON BY LEARNED COUNSEL ARE NOT APPLIC ABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE SINCE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE ARE DIFFERENT FROM THE FACTS OF THE CASES RELIED UPON BY LEARNED COUNSEL. KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACT S AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE ADDITION MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS HEREBY CONFIRMED AND THE FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 6. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE IS N OW IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 7. BEFORE US THE LEARNED A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE DIFF ERENCE IN THE BALANCES HAS ARISEN ON ACCOUNT OF THE DIFFERENT METHODS OF A CCOUNTING FOLLOWED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ITS CLIENTS. HE SUBMITTED THAT TH E CLIENTS DEDUCT TDS AT THE TIME OF MAKING PAYMENT WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE CON SIDERS THE INCOME AS AND WHEN IT RAISES THE BILL AS IT FOLLOWS MERCAN TILE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING. HE THEREFORE SUBMITTED THAT THE CASE OF ASSESSEE CANNOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE ONE WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DIS CLOSED THE INCOME. ITA NO 2327/ AHD/2009 . A.Y. 2003- 04 4 HE ALSO PLACED ON RECORD THE CHART SHOWING DETAILS OF SALES AS PER THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AMOUNT AS PER TDS CERTIFICATES AN D ITS RECONCILIATION. FROM THE AFORESAID CHART HE POINTED OUT AT THE ASS ESSEE HAS BOOKED SALES OF 2 51 00 000/- AS AGAINST THE AMOUNT OF RS. 1 44 00 000/- HAS SHOWN AS PER THE TDS CERTIFICATE. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THE D ETAILS FOR A.Y. 2004-05 AND 05-06. HE THUS REITERATED THAT BASED ON THE AC COUNTING SYSTEM CONSISTENTLY FOLLOWED BY ASSESSEE THE CORRECT INCO ME HAS BEEN BOOKED. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IF DEEMED FIT THE RECONC ILIATION SUBMITTED BE SENT TO A.O. FOR VERIFICATION. 8. THE LD. D.R. ON THE OTHER HAND SUBMITTED THAT THE A SSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THE CREDIT FOR ENTIRE TDS AND THE A.O. HAS RIGHTLY MADE THE ADDITIONS. HE THUS SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF A.O. 9. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. BEFORE US THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED ITS METHOD OF ACC OUNTING FOR THE BOOKING OF INCOME. ACCORDING TO THE A.R. IT BOOKS INCOME ON THE BASIS OF BILLS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BUT HOWEVER THE TDS IS DEDUCTED BY THE CLIENTS ON THE BASIS OF PAYMENT. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO SUBMITTED THE DETAILS OF SALES AS PER ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND TH E AMOUNT RECEIVED AS SHOWN IN THE TDS CERTIFICATE FOR A.YS. 02-03 03-04 & 04-05. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO SUBMITTED RECONCILIATION STATEMEN T OF TDS. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IN THE PRESENT CASE THE SUBMISSION AN D THE RECONCILIATION STATEMENT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH THE METH OD OF ACCOUNTING FOLLOWED FOR BOOKING THE INCOME AND CLAIMED OF TDS CREDIT NEEDS VERIFICATION. WE THEREFORE REMIT THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF A.O. AND DIRECT HIM TO CONSIDER THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE LIGHT OF THE PROPER ITA NO 2327/ AHD/2009 . A.Y. 2003- 04 5 METHOD OF ACCOUNTING THAT NEEDS TO BE FOLLOWED BY A SSESSEE AND THEREAFTER DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH AS PER LAW. NEE DLESS TO STATE THAT THE A.O. SHALL GRANT ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. WE ALSO DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO COOPERATE WITH THE A.O. BY PROMPTLY FILING ALL THE NECESSARY DETAILS AS REQUIRED BY THE A.O TO DEC IDE THE ISSUE. 10. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 04 -10 - 2013. SD/- SD/- (MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT) (ANIL CHATURVEDI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD. TRUE COPY RAJESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR. ITAT AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITA T AHMEDABAD