V.N.Thushar, Alappuzha v. DCIT, Ernakulam

ITA 308/COCH/2009 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 30-11-2011

Appeal Details

RSA Number 30821914 RSA 2009
Assessee PAN ACSPT0706A
Bench Cochin
Appeal Number ITA 308/COCH/2009
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 3 day(s)
Appellant V.N.Thushar, Alappuzha
Respondent DCIT, Ernakulam
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 30-11-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 30-11-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 18-10-2011
Next Hearing Date 18-10-2011
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 27-05-2009
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH COCHIN BEFORE S/SHRI N.R.S.GANESAN JM AND SANJAY AROR A AM I.T.A NO. 308/COCH/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 V.N.THUSHAR VELLAPPALLY HOUSE KANICHUKULANGARA CHERTHALA ALLEPPEY. [PAN:ACSPT 0706A] VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 ERNAKULAM. (ASSESSEE-APPELLANT) (REVENUE-RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY SHRI R.SREENIVASAN CA REVENUE BY MS. S. VIJAYAPRABHA DR DATE OF HEARING 18/10/2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER BY THE CIT(A)-III KOCHI DATED 12.2.2009 AND PERTAIN TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. 2. SHRI R.SREENIVASAN LD. REPRESENTATIVE OF THE AS SESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING INCOME OF ` 12 02 556/- . HOWEVER THE ASSESSING OFFICER IGNORED THE SAME AND ESTIMATED THE INCOME A T 10% OF THE TOTAL SALES. REFERRING TO THE CHART FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH SHOWS THE INC OME RETURNED/ASSESSED FOR THE DIFFERENT ASSESSMENT YEARS THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE OF THE AS SESSEE WOULD SUBMIT THAT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 THE ASSESSEE HAS RETURNED THE INCOME OF . ` 3 08 528/-. HOWEVER THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASSESSED THE INCOME AT ` 15 LAKHS. ON APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE THE I.T.A. NO.308 /COCH/2009 2 CIT(A) REDUCED THE INCOME TO ` 3 50 000/-. AGAIN FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME CLAIMING A LOSS OF ` 10 60 431/-. HOWEVER THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASSESSED THE INCOME AT ` 15 LAKHS. ON APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE THE CIT(A) REDUCED THE SAME TO ` 4 LAKHS. SIMILARLY FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-0 4 THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME CLAIMING LOSS A T ` 6 44 567/-. HOWEVER THE ASSESSING OFFICER ESTIMATED THE INCOME AT ` 15 LAKHS. THE CIT(A) HOWEVER REDUCED THE SAME TO ` 4 50 000/-. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 THE A SSESSEE RETURNED THE INCOME AT ` 1 65 563/- . HOWEVER THE ASSESSING OFFICER AGAIN ESTIMATED THE SAME AT ` 15 LAKHS. ON APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE THE CIT(A) REDUCED THE INCO ME AT ` 5 LAKHS. DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSEE H IMSELF RETURNED THE INCOME AT ` 12 02 556/- . HOWEVER THE ASSESSING OFFICER TAKIN G 10% OF THE TOTAL SALES TURNOVER ESTIMATED THE INCOME AT ` 20 213 434/-. ON APPEAL THE CIT(A) REDUCED THE IN COME TO ` 15 LAKHS. ACCORDINGLY THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT WHEN THE CIT(A) HAS ACCEPTED THE INCOME UNIFORMLY FROM ` 4 TO ` 5 LAKHS FOR THIS YEAR ALSO THE CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE ESTIMATED THE INCOME BY COMPARIN G THE EARLIER YEAR INCOME SINCE THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF HAS RETURNED INCOME OF ` 12 02 556/-. THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE DELETED THE ENTIRE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. ON THE CONTRARY MS. S.VIJAYAPRABHA THE LD. DEP ARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THOUGH FOR EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS THE CIT(A) ESTIMATED THE INCOME AT ` 4 LAKHS TO 4 50 000/- FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATI ON THE ASSESSEE HAS HIMSELF RETURNED THE INCOME AT ` 12 02 556/-. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTTIVE SUB MITTED THAT THE INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS VERY HIGH. TH EREFORE BY TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE RETURNS OF INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PREVIOUS YEARS THE CIT(A) FIXED THE INCOME AT ` 15 LAKHS. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 THE ASSESSEES INCOME WAS FIXED AT ` 3 50 000/- FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 ` 4 LAKHS. FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 ` 4 50 000/- AND FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 ` 5 LAKHS. IT APPEARS THAT THE REVENUE CHALLENGED TH E ORDER OF I.T.A. NO.308 /COCH/2009 3 THE CIT(A) FOR ALL THE FOUR YEARS AND THE TRIBUNAL CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 17.8.2009 IN I.T.A. NOS. 622 623 62 4 & 625/COCH/08. THEREFORE FOR THOSE EARLIER YEARS THE INCOME DETERMINED BY THE CI T(A) BECAME FINAL. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSEE O RIGINALLY HAS NOT FILED ANY RETURN OF INCOME EVEN AFTER ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S. 142(1) OF TH E ACT. HOWEVER IN THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETU RN DECLARING INCOME OF ` 12 02 556/-. SINCE THE RETURN WAS FILED BEYOND TIME LIMIT THE A SSESSING OFFICER IGNORED THE RETURN AND ESTIMATED THE INCOME AT 10% OF THE TOTAL SALES. ON APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE THE CIT(A) AFTER TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION OF THE INCOME RETU RNED BY THE ASSESSEE FOUND THAT THE ESTIMATION OF INCOME AT 10% IS VERY HIGH AND. ACCO RDINGLY FIXED THE INCOME AT ` 15 LAKHS. THE FACT REMAINS THAT NO AUTHORITIES EXAMIN ED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND IT IS ALSO NOT CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS M AINTAINING ANY BOOKS FOR HIS BUSINESS. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY MATERIAL LIKE SUPPORTING VOUC HERS BILLS ETC. AND BOOKS OF ACCOUNT THE INCOME HAS TO BE ESTIMATED. DURING THE YEAR UN DER CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF RETURNED ` 12 02 556/-. THEREFORE IN OUR OPINION THE CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY FIXED THE INCOME AT ` 15 LAKHS. WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE W ITH THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS CONFIR MED. 5. IN THE RESULT THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSE D. (SANJAY ARORA) (N.R.S.GANESAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER J UDICIAL MEMBER PLACE: ERNAKULAM DATED: OCTOBER 2011 GJ COPY TO: 1. V.N.THUSHAR VELLAPPALLY HOUSE KANICHUKULANGARA CHERTHALA ALLEPPEY. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRA L CIRCLE-1 ERNAKULAM. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-III KO CHI. 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL KOCHI. 5. D.R. I.T.A.T. COCHIN BENCH COCHIN. I.T.A. NO.308 /COCH/2009 4 6. GUARD FILE .