Vicky Roadways Badodi, Shivpuri v. J.C.I.T., Range-3, Gwalior

ITA 38/AGR/2013 | 2009-2010
Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2013 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 3820314 RSA 2013
Assessee PAN AAGFV3483L
Bench Agra
Appeal Number ITA 38/AGR/2013
Duration Of Justice 8 month(s) 26 day(s)
Appellant Vicky Roadways Badodi, Shivpuri
Respondent J.C.I.T., Range-3, Gwalior
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 31-10-2013
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 31-10-2013
Date Of Final Hearing 30-10-2013
Next Hearing Date 30-10-2013
Assessment Year 2009-2010
Appeal Filed On 04-02-2013
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH AGRA BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 38/AGRA/2013 ASSTT. YEAR : 2009-10 VICKY ROADWAYS VS. J.C.I.T. RANGE-3 BADODI A.B. ROAD SHIVPURI. GWALIOR. (PAN : AAGFV 3483 L) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI K.C. AGARWAL ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI WASEEM ARSHAD SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 30.10.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER : 31.10.2013 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI J.M.: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) GWALIOR DATED 05.12.2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 09-10. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH TH E PARTIES PERUSED THE FINDINGS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND CONSIDERED TH E MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3. ON GROUND NO. 1 TO 4 THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED TH E ADDITION OF RS.50 80 110/- ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE U/S. 40(A)(IA) OF THE IT ACT. THE ASSESSEE IS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM AND IS DERIVING INCOME FROM TRANSP ORTATION BUSINESS. DURING THE ITA NO. 38/AGRA/2013 2 YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSEE FIRM HAS SHO WN GROSS RECEIPTS OF RS.22.83 CRORES YIELDING NET PROFIT @ 5.29% BEFORE ALLOWING INTEREST AND SALARY PAID TO THE PARTNERS AS AGAINST GROSS RECEIPTS OF RS.9.89 CRORE S YIELDING NET PROFIT @ 4.63% WHICH WAS FOUND BETTER. THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE FREIG HT PAYMENTS OF RS.2.14 CRORES WITHOUT SUBJECTING TO TAX DEDUCTION TO VARIOUS TRUC K OWNERS CONTRACTED/SUB- CONTRACTED TO EXECUTE HIS FREIGHT CONTRACT WITH PRI NCIPALS. ON PERUSAL OF THE PAYMENT DETAILS IT WAS NOTICED THAT IN A NUMBER OF CASES THE SUB-CONTRACTED AMOUNT AGREED TO BE PAID IS MORE THAN RS.20 000/-. THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF SUCH PAYMENT COMES TO RS.50 80 110/-. THE ASSESSEE WAS A SKED TO FILE THE DETAILS OF TRUCK-WISE FREIGHT PAYMENTS WITHOUT TDS ON HIRED TR UCKS TO VERIFY THE VIOLATION U/S. 40(A)(IA) OF THE IT ACT. THE REPLY OF THE ASSE SSEE IS REPRODUCED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE BRIEFLY EXPL AINED THAT FREIGHTS HAVE BEEN PAID TO THE VEHICLE OWNERS WITHIN THE LIMIT SPECIFI ED UNDER THE IT ACT AND WHERE HIGHER AMOUNT IS PAID THE TAX HAS BEEN DEDUCTED AS PER LAW AND DEPOSITED WITH THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE FILED COMPLETE LIS T BEFORE THE AO TO SHOW THAT THE PAYMENTS IN QUESTION VARY BETWEEN THE RANGE OF RS.20 000/- - 50 000/- THEREFORE THE ABOVE PROVISION WOULD NOT APPLY IN T HE CASE OF ASSESSEE. NO PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE IN CONTRAVENTION OF ANY PRO VISION BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT MADE ANY PAYMENT MORE THAN RS.20 000/- AT A NY POINT OF TIME DURING YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AND COMPLETE DETAILS ARE NOTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THE ITA NO. 38/AGRA/2013 3 ASSESSEE MAINTAINED SEPARATE LEDGER FOR EACH VEHICL E. THE SAME WOULD ALSO SHOW THAT THE PAYMENTS DID NOT EXCEED RS.50 000/- IN THE YEAR. THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C WOULD ALSO NOT APPLY AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AND THE PROVISIO OF SECTION 194C(3) IS IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE THEREFO RE SUBMITTED THAT SINCE PAYMENTS MADE TO THE VEHICLE OWNERS IS LESS THAN RS.20 000/- THERE IS NO LIABILITY TO DEDUCT INCOME-TAX AT SOURCE. SUBJECT TO THAT THE TOTAL PA YMENT DOES NOT EXCEED RS.50 000/-. IT WAS THEREFORE SUBMITTED THAT THER E IS NO VIOLATION OF ANY OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. 4. THE AO ON VERIFICATION OF THE DETAILS AND ON EXA MINATION FOUND THAT THE PAYMENTS ARE MADE IN THE SUM BELOW RS.20 000/- AT O NE TIME/SINGLE DAY ON A TEST CHECK BASIS. THE ASSESSEE ALSO CONFIRMED THAT AT ON E TIME IN A SINGLE DAY NO PAYMENT EXCEEDING RS.20 000/- WAS MADE IN CASH. THE AO ALSO EXAMINED THE ISSUE IN THE LIGHT OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C OF T HE IT ACT WHERE THE SUM CREDITED OR PAID WAS LIKELY TO EXCEED RS.20 000/-. THE AO CO NSIDERING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO DEDUCT TAX FROM THE PAYMENTS OF SUM AMOUNTING TO RS.50 80 110/-. THEREFORE THERE I S VIOLATION OF THE PROVISION OF SECTION 40(A)(IA) AND AS SUCH ADDITION OF RS.50 80 110/- WAS MADE FOR VIOLATION TO DEDUCT TAX U/S. 194C OF THE IT ACT. THE ADDITION WA S CHALLENGED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS ALREADY MADE BEFORE THE AO. IT ITA NO. 38/AGRA/2013 4 WAS CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT MADE ANY PA YMENT WHICH EXCEEDS RS.20 000/- INDIVIDUALLY AND IN AGGREGATE RS.50 000 /- IN A YEAR. COMPLETE DETAILS WERE ALSO FILED. THE LD. CIT(A) HOWEVER DID NOT A CCEPT THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION. 5. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND SUBMITTED THAT THE PROVISO TO SECTION 194C(3) OF THE IT ACT IS CLEARLY ATTRACTED IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE FOR DELET ING THE ADDITION. THE DETAILS OF ALL THE PAYMENTS TO INDIVIDUAL TRUCK OWNERS ARE FILED I N PAPER BOOK FROM PAGES 9 TO 190. MONTHLY LIST OF FREIGHT PAYMENTS ARE FILED AT PAGES 191 TO 200 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND DETAILS OF FREIGHT ARE FILED AT PAGE 201 O F THE PAPER BOOK. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE OWNERS OF HIRED TRUCKS ARE NOT SUB-CONTRACTORS AND THE ASSESSEE HAS HIRED THE TRUCKS FOR JOB WORK ONLY TH EREFORE THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C WOULD NOT APPLY. HE HAS RELIED UPON CERTAIN DE CISIONS OF DIFFERENT BENCHES OF TRIBUNAL AND HIGH COURT IN RESPECT OF CONTENTION WH ICH WE WOULD TAKE UP LATER ON COPIES OF WHICH ARE FILED IN THE PAPER BOOK. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-SEC. (3) OF SECTION 194C OF THE I T ACT PROVIDES AS UNDER : ITA NO. 38/AGRA/2013 5 (3) NO DECLARATION SHALL BE MADE UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OR SUB SECTION (2) FROM--- [(I) THE AMOUNT OF ANY SUM CREDITED OR PAID OR LIKE LY TO BE CREDITED OR PAID TO THE ACCOUNT OF OR TO THE CONTRACTOR OR SUB-CON TRACTOR IF SUCH SUM DOES NOT EXCEED TWENTY THOUSAND RUPEES: PROVIDED THAT WHERE THE AGGREGATE OF THE AMOUNTS OF SUCH SUM S CREDITED OR PAID OR LIKELY TO BE CREDITED OR PAID DURING THE FI NANCIAL YEAR EXCEEDS FIFTY THOUSAND RUPEES THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING SUCH SUMS REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTION (1) OR AS THE CASE MAY BE SUB-SECTION (2) SHALL BE LIABLE TO DEDUCT INCOME-TAX [UNDER THIS SECTION:] PROVIDED FURTHER THAT NO DEDUCTION SHALL BE MADE UNDER SUB SECTION ( 2) FROM THE AMOUNT OF ANY SUM CREDITED OR PAID OR LIKE LY TO BE CREDITED OR PAID DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR TO THE ACCOUNT OF THE SUB- CONTRACTOR DURING THE COURSE OF BUSINESS OF PLYING HIRING OR LEASING GOO DS CARRIAGES ON PRODUCTION OF A DECLARATION TO THE PERSON CONCERNED PAYING OR CREDITING SUCH SUM IN THE PRESCRIBED FORM AND VERIFIED IN TH E PRESCRIBED MANNER AND WITHIN SUCH TIME AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED IF SUCH SUB- CONTRACTOR IS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS NOT OWNED MORE THAN TWO GOODS CA RRIAGES AT ANY TIME DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR. PROVIDED ALSO THAT THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING ANY SUM AS A FORESAID TO THE SUB-CONTRACTOR REFERRED TO IN THE SECOND PROVIS O SHALL FURNISH TO THE PRESCRIBED INCOME TAX AUTHORITY OR THE PERSON AUTHO RIZED BY IT SUCH PARTICULARS AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED IN SUCH FORM AND W ITHIN SUCH TIME AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED; OR] (II) ANY SUM CREDITED OR PAID BEFORE THE 1 ST DAY OF JUNE 1972 [OR] (III) ANY SUM CREDITED OR PAID BEFORE THE 1 ST DAY OF JUNE 1973 IN PURSUANCE OF A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CONTRACTOR AND A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY OR IN PURSUANCE OF A CONTRACT BETWEEN SUCH CONTRACTOR AND THE SUB-C ONTRACTOR IN RELATION TO ANY WORK (INCLUDING SUPPLY OF LABOUR FOR CARRYING O UT ANY WORK) UNDERTAKEN BY THE CONTRACTOR FOR THE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY.] ITA NO. 38/AGRA/2013 6 7. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE DETAILS OF EACH INDIV IDUAL PAYMENT IN PAPER BOOK FROM PAGES 9 TO 190 AND IT WOULD PROVE THAT THE PAY MENTS WERE MADE IN A SUM BELOW RS.20 000/- AT ONE TIME/SINGLE DAY. THE AO AL SO ACCEPTED THE SAME FACT IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THUS THE ABOVE PROVISIONS SP ECIFICALLY PROVIDE FOR ANY SUM CREDITED OR PAID OR LIKELY TO BE CREDITED OR PAID WHICH THUS WOULD INDICATE TO THE SINGULAR PAYMENT. IT IS THEREFORE ADMITTED FACT T HAT THE SUM PAID BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE OWNERS OF THE TRUCK DID NOT EXCEED RS.20 000/- ON EACH OCCASION AND THE AGGREGATE AMOUNT ALSO DID NOT EXCEED RS.50 000/- DU RING THE FINANCIAL YEAR. THE PROVISO TO SECTION 194C(3) THUS WOULD APPLY IN FA VOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT. THERE IS ALSO NO WRITTEN CO NTRACT BROUGHT ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS ANY CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ASSESS EE AND THE TRUCK OWNERS FOR CARRYING OUT ANY WORK. THEREFORE THE DEFINITION OF SUB-CONTRACT WOULD ALSO NOT APPLY IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE BECAUSE THE CASE OF T HE ASSESSEE IS SIMPLY HAVING HIRING OF TRUCKS FOR DOING THE JOB WORK. 7.1 THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RELIED UPON TH E ORDER OF THE ITAT AGRA BENCH IN THE GROUP CASES OF ACIT VS. VIPIN ARORA IN ITA NO. 306/AGRA/2009 DATED 17.06.2011 WHICH IS A CASE OF INDIVIDUAL WHO IS THE PARTNER IN THE ASSESSEE FIRM IN WHICH ON THE SAME ISSUE THE TRIBUNAL FOLLOW ING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. AVNEESH KUMAR SINGH IN ITA NO. 592 /AGRA/2008 DELETED THE ITA NO. 38/AGRA/2013 7 SIMILAR ADDITION HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT LIABLE TO DEDUCT TAX AT SOURCE AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C ON THE PAYMENTS MADE TO THE LORRY OWNERS ON LORRY HIRED. 7.2 HE HAS ALSO RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF ITAT V ISHAKHAPATNAM BENCH IN THE CASE OF MYTHRI TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. ACIT 124 TTJ 970 IN WHICH IT WAS HELD AS UNDER : ASSESSEE A TRANSPORT CONTRACTOR HAVING ITSELF EXE CUTED THE WHOLE OF THE CONTRACT FOR TRANSPORTATION OF BITUMEN BY HIRING LORRIES FROM OTHER LORRY OWNERS WHO SIMPLY PLACED THE VEHIC LES AT THE DISPOSAL OF THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT INVOLVING THEMSELV ES IN CARRYING OUT ANY PART OF THE WORK UNDERTAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE PAYMENTS MADE FOR HIRING OF VEHICLES FELL IN TH E CATEGORY OF PAYMENTS TOWARDS SUB-CONTRACTS AND THEREFORE ASSE SSEE WAS NOT LIABLE TO DEDUCT TAX AT SOURCE AS PER THE PROVISION S OF S. 194C(2) FROM THE PAYMENTS MADE TO THE LORRY OWNERS AND CONSEQUEN TLY PROVISIONS OF S. 40(A)(IA) WERE NOT APPLICABLE TO SUCH PAYMENT S. 7.3 HE HAS ALSO RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF HONBLE PUN JAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT (TDS) VS. UNITED RICE LAND LTD. 174 TAXMAN 286 (P&H) IN WHICH IT WAS HELD SECTION 194C OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961 DEDUCTI ON OF TAX AT SOURCE CONTRACTORS/SUB-CONTRACTORS PAYMENTS T O ASSESSEE- COMPANY WAS ENGAGED IN BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURE AND EXPORT OF RICE DURING COURSE OF EXPORT ACTIVITY IT TRANSPORTED RI CE FROM ITS PLACE OF BUSINESS TO PORT BY ENGAGING TRUCKS THROUGH TRANSPO RTERS FREIGHT CHARGES WERE PAID BY ASSESSEE DIRECTLY TO TRUCK OWN ERS/OPERATORS OR THROUGH TRANSPORTERS THERE WAS NO ORAL OR WRITTEN CONTRACT BETWEEN ASSESSEE AND TRANSPORTERS WHETHER ON FACTS ASSES SEE WAS LIABLE TO ITA NO. 38/AGRA/2013 8 DEDUCT TAX AT SOURCE ON FREIGHT CHARGES PAID TO TRU CK OWNERS / OPERATORS HELD NO. 7.4 DECISION OF PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. BHAGWATI STEELS 241 CTR 480 IN WHICH IT WAS HELD WHERE THE TRIBUNAL HAS RECORDED A CATEGORICAL FIND ING OF FACT THERE WAS NO MATERIAL ON RECORD TO PROVE ANY WRITTE N OR ORAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE AND THE RECIPIENTS O F GOODS FOR TRANSPORTATION AND THAT THE PAYMENT OF FREIGHT HAD NOT BEEN SHOWN TO HAVE BEEN MADE IN PURSUANCE TO CONTRACT OF TRANSPOR TATION OF GOODS FOR A SPECIFIC PERIOD QUANTITY OR PRICE AND FURTH ER NONE OF THE INDIVIDUAL PAYMENT EXCEEDED RS.20 000 THERE WAS NO LIABILITY TO DEDUCT TAX UNDER S. 194C AND DISALLOWANCE UNDER S. 40(A)(IA)WAS RIGHTLY DELETED. 7.5 DECISION OF HONBLE GUJRAT HIGH COURT IN THE CA SE OF CIT VS. HATISH RAMANLAL PATEL 217 TAXMAN 26 IN WHICH IT WAS HELD SECTION 194C READ WITH SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE I NCOME-TAX ACT 1961 DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE CONTRACTOR S/SUB-CONTRACTORS PAYMENTS TO [CONDITION PRECEDENT] WHETHER WHERE N O INDIVIDUAL PAYMENT MADE TO ANY SUB-CONTRACTOR EXCEEDED RS.20 0 00 AT A TIME NOR TOTAL PAYMENTS TO AN INDIVIDUAL EXCEEDED RS.50 000 IN A YEAR TDS LIABILITY UNDER SECTION 194C WOULD NOT ARISE HELD YES. 8. CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF A BOVE PROVISIONS AND THE ABOVE CASE LAWS RELIED UPON BEFORE US WE ARE OF TH E VIEW THAT PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C(3) ARE NOT APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE AND AS SUCH THE ASSESSEE IS NOT LIABLE TO DEDUCT TDS. THEREFORE THE ADDITION IS WH OLLY UNJUSTIFIED. WE ACCORDINGLY ITA NO. 38/AGRA/2013 9 SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND D ELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.50 80 110/-. GROUNDS NOS. 1 TO 4 OF APPEAL OF TH E ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 9. ON GROUND NO. 5 THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE DIS ALLOWANCE OF RS.4 72 080/- OUT OF TRUCK FREIGHT EXPENSES. THE AO ON EXAMINATIO N OF THE RECORD FOUND THAT CERTAIN VOUCHERS WERE NOT PRODUCED AND SOME OF THE VOUCHERS WERE NOT FOUND AND EVEN CERTAIN PAYMENTS ARE RELATED TO CHALLANS INAM S/TRAFFIC POLICE EXPENSES. EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS CALLED FOR AS TO WH Y DISALLOWANCE SHOULD NOT BE MADE BECAUSE PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE FOR VIOLATION OF LAW. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED BEFORE THE AO THAT GENERALLY CHALLANS ARE PAID BY THE CONCERNED PERSONS FOR VIOLATION OF TRAFFIC RULES BUT MANY A TIMES E XPENSES ARE REIMBURSED. INAMS ARE PAID FOR SMOOTH RUNNING OF VEHICLES DURING THE COUR SE OF TRANSPORTATION WHICH GENERALLY HAPPENS IN THE LINE OF TRANSPORT BUSINESS . THE AO DID NOT ACCEPT THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE THE PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE FOR VIOLATION OF LAW WHICH IS SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITED BY EXPLANATION TO SECTION 37 OF THE T ACT. THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION. 10. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE A RE OF THE VIEW THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE CORRECTLY MADE DISALLOWANCE OUT OF THE A FORESAID EXPENSES. THE EXPLANATION TO SECTION 37 OF THE IT ACT PROVIDES TH AT ANY EXPENSE INCURRED BY THE ITA NO. 38/AGRA/2013 10 ASSESSEE FOR THE PURPOSE WHICH IS AN OFFENCE OR PRO HIBITED IN LAW SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN INCURRED FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUS INESS OR PROFESSION AND NO DEDUCTION SHALL BE MADE IN RESPECT OF SUCH EXPENDIT URE. THE REIMBURSEMENT OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR VIOLATION OF TRAFFIC RULES IS NOT P ROPER BECAUSE THE CHALLANS AMOUNT IS PAID FOR VIOLATION OF LAW AND OFFENCE COMMITTED RELATING TO MOTOR VEHICLE ACT. SIMILARLY PAYMENTS MADE TO BRIBING POLICE INAMS I S NOT THE EXPENDITURE PERMISSIBLE UNDER THE LAW OF LAND. THEREFORE DISAL LOWANCE IS JUSTIFIED AND GROUND NO. 5 OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ACCORDINGLY DISM ISSED. 11. ON GROUND NO. 6 THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE DI SALLOWANCE OF RS.1 00 000/- OUT OF REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE. THE AO NOTED THAT C ERTAIN EXPENSES WERE EITHER NOT SUPPORTED BY PROPER VOUCHERS OR THERE IS NO INTERNA L VOUCHERS. IN ORDER TO COVER UP POSSIBLE LEAKAGES OF INCOME SUM OF RS.1 00 000/- W AS DISALLOWED. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THAT COMPLETE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND VOUCHERS WERE PRODUCED BEFORE THE AO IN WHICH NO SPECIFIC SHORTCO MINGS WERE FOUND. THEREFORE ADHOC DISALLOWANCE IS NOT JUSTIFIED. THE LD. CIT(A) HOWEVER DID NOT ACCEPT THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON THIS ISSUE. 13. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE A RE OF THE VIEW THE ADDITION IS ADHOC IN NATURE WITHOUT POINTING OUT ANY SPECIFIC V OUCHERS NOT PRODUCED BEFORE THE ITA NO. 38/AGRA/2013 11 AO. THE ASSESSEE MAINTAINED BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WHICH ARE AUDITED AND WERE PRODUCED BEFORE THE AO. THE AO MADE DISALLOWANCE WI THOUT POINTING OUT ANY SPECIFIC INADMISSIBLE EXPENDITURE AND IN ORDER TO C OVER UP POSSIBLE LEAKAGES OF INCOME WHICH WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE ADDITION IS AD HOC IN NATURE. THEREFORE THE ADDITION IS WHOLLY UNJUSTIFIED. WE ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND DELETE THIS ADDITION. IN THE RESULT GROUND NO. 6 OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 14. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PA RTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (PRAMOD KUMAR) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) CONCERNED BY ORDER 4. CIT CONCERNED 5. DR ITAT AGRA 6. GUARD FILE SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY TRUE COPY