SWAPNA V. AMIN, MUMBAI v. ITO 24(3)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 3084/MUM/2010 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 18-03-2011 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 308419914 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN ADTPA8290J
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 3084/MUM/2010
Duration Of Justice 10 month(s) 28 day(s)
Appellant SWAPNA V. AMIN, MUMBAI
Respondent ITO 24(3)(3), MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 18-03-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted SMC
Tribunal Order Date 18-03-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 10-03-2011
Next Hearing Date 10-03-2011
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 20-04-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI SMC BENCH BEFORE SHRI T.R.SOOD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.NO.3084/MUM/2010 - A.Y 2006-07 MRS. SWAPNA V. AMIN RAHEJA SHERWOOD TOWER C 805 GLEN EAGLE NIRLON COMPOUND GOREGAON (E) MUMBAI 400 063. PAN: ADTPA 8290 J VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER 24(3)(3) MUMBAI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : MS. AARTI SATHE. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SATBIR SINGH.. O R D E R IN THIS APPEAL ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING G ROUND: THE LEARNED CIT[APPEALS] 34 MUMBAI HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ASSESSING OFFICERS ORDER OF ADDITION TO BUSINESS INCOME U/S. 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 BEING THE DIFFERENCE IN GROSS RECEIPTS AS PER PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND GROSS RECEIPTS AS PER TDS CERTIFICATES WITHOUT CON SIDERING THE FACT THAT YOUR PETITIONER HAS SHOWN BUSINESS INCOME AS PER THE PRO VISIONS OF SURENDRA ELASTOMERS PVT. LTD. 44AE OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 19 61 AND YOUR PETITIONER FOLLOWS CASH SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING. 2. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES I FIND THAT ASSE SSEE IS RUNNING TRUCK HIRE BUSINESS AND HAD DECLARED TOTAL EXPENSES AT ` `` ` .11 23 184/-. ON THIS NET PROFIT OF ` `` ` .2 53 715/- BEING 22.58% WAS DECLARED AS INCOME. TH OUGH INCOME WAS HIGHER THAN PROFIT U/S.44AE STILL ASSESSEE HAD OFFERED THE HIGHER AMOUNT. HOWEVER DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ON THE BASIS OF AIR R EPORT IT WAS FOUND THAT THERE WAS SOME DISCREPANCY IN THE TDS CERTIFICATE AS PER DETAILS BELOW: SR.NO. NAME OF THE PARTY AMOUNT RECEIVED 1. M/S STC MOVERS PVT.LTD. ` `` ` . 99 321/- 2. M/S TRANSFER INDIA PVT. LTD. ` `` ` . 2 04 825/- 3. M/S MONARYAS MARINE SERVICES ` `` ` . 8 19 018/- RS. 11 23 164/- 2 WHEREAS AS PER TDS CERTIFICATE THE RECEIPTS ARE AS UNDER: SR.NO. NAME OF THE PARTY AMOUNT RECEIVED 1. M/S STC MOVERS PVT.LTD. ` `` ` . 1 84 900/- 2. M/S TRANSFER INDIA PVT. LTD. ` `` ` . 2 19 900/- 3. M/S MONARYAS MARINE SERVICES ` `` ` . 8 21 530/- ` `` ` .11 23 164 THUS THERE WAS DIFFERENCE OF LRS.1 08 166/- WHICH HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THIS ADDITION HAS BEEN CONF IRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 3. BEFORE ME LD.COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED T HAT ASSESSEE WAS OPERATING ONLY ONE TRUCK AND AS PER SEC.44AE ONLY I NCOME REQUIRED TO BE DECLARED WAS RS.42 000/- WHEREAS ASSESSEE HAD ALREA DY SHOWN INCOME OF RS.2 53 715/- WHICH IS MUCH HIGHER AND EVEN WOULD C OVER THE DISCREPANCY NOTICED IN THE TDS CERTIFICATE AND ACCORDINGLY THE ADDITION WAS NOT JUSTIFIED. SHE FURTHER FILED A PAPER BOOK AND REFERRED TO PAGE 5 A ND POINTED OUT THAT CERTAIN TDS AMOUNTS HAD BEEN CREDITED IN THIS YEAR AS ON 31 ST MARCH FOR WHICH CHEQUES WERE RECEIVED IN NEXT YEAR. THEN SHE REFERRED TO PA GE 6 AND POINTED OUT THAT THESE CHEQUES HAVE ALREADY BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR IN YE AR THEREFORE THIS ADDITION IS NOT JUSTIFIED AT ALL. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND LD.DR SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS HIMSELF DECLARED HIGHER INCOME AND THEREFORE CANNOT TAKE SHELTER U /S.44AE. FURTHER THE PAPERS SUBMITTED BEFORE ME HAVE NOT BEEN FILED BEFORE THE AO OR THE CIT(A). THEREFORE SAME COULD NOT BE RELIED ON NOW. 5. IN THE REJOINDER LD.COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUB MITTED THAT SHE WOULD HAVE NO OBJECTION IF THE MATTER IS SENT BACK FOR VE RIFICATION OF THE AO. 6. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS CAREFULL Y. FROM PAGE 5 OF THE PAPER BOOK WHICH IS A COPY OF ACCOUNTS IT IS CLEA R THAT CERTAIN TDS CERTIFICATES 3 HAVE BEEN CREDITED AT THE END OF THE YEAR. FROM PAG E 6 OF THE PAPER BOOK WHICH IS A COPY OF CARTAGE ACCOUNT FOR NEXT F. Y. WHICH I S CLEAR THAT CHEQUES RECEIVED IN RELATION TO TDS DEDUCTED IN THE EARLIER YEAR HAVE B EEN INCLUDED IN THE CARTAGE ACCOUNT OF NEXT YEAR. THEREFORE IT IS CLEAR THAT A SSESSEE HAS ALREADY ACCOUNTED FOR THESE RECEIPTS. HOWEVER SINCE THESE WERE NOT B EFORE THE AO I SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK T O THE FILE OF THE WITH A DIRECTION TO VERIFY THE CARTAGE ACCOUNT OF THIS YEA R WITH THAT OF NEXT YEAR. IF THE CARTAGE RECEIPTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN INCLUDED IN THE NEXT YEAR THEN NO ADDITION IS CALLED FOR OTHERWISE AO MAY PROCEED IN ACCORDANCE W ITH LAW. 7. IN THE RESULT APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS DAY OF 18/3/2011. SD/- (T.R.SOOD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI:18/3/2011. P/-*