Mrs. Margina Begum, Howrah v. ITO, Ward - 46(2), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 519/KOL/2010 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 08-09-2011

Appeal Details

RSA Number 51923514 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AHWPB0291K
Bench Kolkata
Appeal Number ITA 519/KOL/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 23 day(s)
Appellant Mrs. Margina Begum, Howrah
Respondent ITO, Ward - 46(2), Kolkata, Kolkata
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 08-09-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 08-09-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 02-06-2011
Next Hearing Date 02-06-2011
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 15-03-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BEN CH B KOLKATA () BEFORE . .. . . .. . SHRI B.R.MITTAL JUDICIAL MEMBER. /AND . .. .!' !'!' !'. .. . #$ SHRI C.D.RAO ACCOUNTANT MEMBER %& %& %& %& ' ' ' ' / ITA NO.519/KOL/2010 () *+/ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 (-. / APPELLANT ) MRS.MARGINA BEGUM KOLKATA (PAN : AHWPB 0291 K) - ( - - VERSUS - . (01-./ RESPONDENT ) I.T.O. WARD-46(2) KOLKATA -. 2 3 #/ FOR THE APPELLANT: SHRI S.P.CHOUDHURY 01-. 2 3 #/ FOR THE RESPONDENT: SHRI S.K.ROY #4 / ORDER ( (( ( . .. .!' !'!' !'. .. . ) )) ) #$ PER SHRI C.D.RAO AM THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST ORDER DATED 18.01.2010 OF THE CIT(A)-XXX KOLKATA PERTAINING TO A.Y. 2006-07. 2. IN THIS APPEAL THOUGH ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN AS MUCH AS SIX GROUND THEY ARE ALL RELATING TO TWO ISSUES. ONE ISSUE IS RELATING TO TH E RECEIPT OF RS.17 66 700/- AND THE OTHER ISSUE IS RELATING TO THE NET PROFIT ESTIMATED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AT 5%. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF BOTH THE ISSUES ARE THA T WHILE DOING THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT AO HAS ADDED AN AMOUNT OF RS.17 66 700/- BY OBSERVI NG AS UNDER :- INFORMATION WAS IN THE POSSESSION OF THE UNDER SIG NED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED AN AMOUNT OF RS.17 66 700/- FROM M/S. AJOY SAREES P VT. LTD. OF 23 PODDAR ROAD MUMBAI. REFERENCE WAS MADE TO THE PARTY AT MUMBAI B UT NO REPLY WAS RECEIVED. A LETTER WAS RECEIVED FROM DIFFERENT CONCERN NAMED AJ OY SAREES (P) LTD. (113 PARK ST.) SHOWING PURCHASE OF RS.1 58 175/- AND HENCE NO COGN IZANCE HAS BEEN TAKEN TO THIS 2 LETTER. HOWEVER THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUESTED TO SHOW CAUSE AS TO WHY THE SAID AMOUNT OF RS.17 66 700/- SHALL NOT BE ADDED TO HER INCOME. BUT TILL DATE HE FAILED EXPLAIN WITH DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES I ADD RS.17 66 700/- TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS INCOME FOR THE YEAR. 3.1. AND ESTIMATION OF INCOME AT 10% BY OBSERV ING AS UNDER :- IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE IN ABSENCE OF ANY DETAI LS EVIDENCE OF RECEIPT PURCHASE AND OTHER EXPENSES AND BOOKS OF ACCOUNT I HAVE NO ALTER NATIVE BUT TO ESTIMATE THE NET PROFIT AT 10% OF THE GROSS RECEIPT OF RS.72 51 786/ - WHICH COMES TO RS.7 25 179/-. 3.2. ON APPEAL LD. CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ADD ITION OF RS.17 66 700/- BY OBSERVING AS UNDER :- THE ITO OBTAINED ITS INFORMATION FROM THE COMPUTER . AS PER THE INFORMATION RECEIVED THE APPELLANT RECEIVED AN AMOUNT OF RS.17 66 700/- FROM M/S.AJOY SAREES PVT. LTD. 23 PODDAR ROAD MUMBAI. THIS INFORMATIO N IS RECEIVED FROM THE DATA BASE OF INFORMATION.. THE APPELLANT MERELY DENIED HAVING RECEIVED THIS AMOUNT FROM THE COMPANY OF MUMBAI. SINCE THE COMPUTER DISCLOSED REC EIPT OF THIS AMOUNT BY THE APPELLANT AND THERE IS NO SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION REGARDING THE INFORMATION BY THE APPELLANT THE AO IS CORRECT AS PER LAW IN MAKING A DDITION OF RS.17 66 700/- TO THE APPELLANTS INCOME. THIS AMOUNT REPRESENTS THE UNDI SCLOSED RECEIPTS OF THE APPELLANT. THE AOS ACTION IS CORRECT AS PER LAW AND IS UPHELD . AS REGARDING ESTIMATION OF INCOME HE RESTRICTED TO 5% OF THE GROSS TOTAL RECEIPTS. 3.3. AGGRIEVED BY THIS ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEF ORE US. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LD. COUNSEL APP EARING ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE BY FILING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES I.E. LETTER OF M/S.AJOY S AREES PVT. LTD. ADDRESSED TO ASSESSEE IN RESPONSE TO ASSESSEES LETTER. DATED 02.07.2010 AND THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY ASSESSEE DATED 29 TH AUGUST 2011 AND BASED ON THIS CONTENDED THAT THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES ON ACCOUNT OF TRANSACTIONS AMOU NTING TO RS.17 66 700/- IS NOT JUSTIFIABLE. AS REGARDING SUSTENANCE OF 5% OF INCOM E ON GROSS RECEIPTS IS NOT TENABLE IN THIS CASE. SINCE THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE PAST HISTORY OF ASSESSEE NOR OTHER RELEVANT CASES OF THE SAME NATUR E OF BUSINESS WHICH ASSESEE IS UNDER TAKING. THEREFORE HE REQUESTED TO SET ASIDE BOTH TH E ISSUES TO THE FILE OF AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. 3 5. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD.DR APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE HAS NOT OBJECTED TO THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD. COUNSEL OF AS SESSEE. 6. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND O N CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ADD ITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BY ASSESSEE IS HAVING BEARING ON THE ISSUE OF ADDITION OF RS.17 66 700/-. THEREFORE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND AFTER TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION OF T HE ABOVE EVIDENCES WE SET ASIDE THE FIRST ISSUE TO THE FILE OF AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATIO N. SINCE WE HAVE SET ASIDE THE FIRST ISSUE TO THE FILE OF AO WE CONSIDER IT FIT TO SET A SIDE THE OTHER ISSUE OF APPLICATION OF PERCENTAGE OF PROFIT ALSO TO THE FILE OF AO IN ORDE R TO DECIDE THE SAME AFTER TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE PAST HISTORY OF ASSESEE. 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 08.09.2011. SD/- SD/- . .. . . .. . B.R.MITTAL JUDICIAL MEMBER . .. .!' !'!' !'. .. . #$ #$ #$ #$ C.D.RAO ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ( (( ('$ '$ '$ '$) )) ) DATE: 08.09.2011. #4 2 0& 5#&*6- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. MRS.MARGINA BEGUM VILL-WEST BAURIA P.O.CHACKKASHI HOWRAH-711307. 2 I.T.O. WARD-46(2) KOLKATA 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A)-XXX KOLKATA 5. DR KOLKATA BENCHES KOLKATA 1& 0/ TRUE COPY #4(;/ BY ORDER DEPUTY /ASST. REGISTRAR ITAT KOLKATA BENCHES R.G.(.P.S.) 4