NARENDRA KUMAR MADAN, MUMBAI v. ITO WD 13(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 6554/MUM/2014 | 2009-2010
Pronouncement Date: 29-11-2017 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 655419914 RSA 2014
Assessee PAN AJPPM3503N
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 6554/MUM/2014
Duration Of Justice 3 year(s) 30 day(s)
Appellant NARENDRA KUMAR MADAN, MUMBAI
Respondent ITO WD 13(2)(1), MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 29-11-2017
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Tags No record found
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 29-11-2017
Last Hearing Date 07-11-2017
First Hearing Date 07-11-2017
Assessment Year 2009-2010
Appeal Filed On 30-10-2014
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH B MU MBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.6554/MUM/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR- 2009-10) SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR MADAN 11 LAXMI BUILDING 2 ND FLOOR OFF. TURNER ROAD BANDRA (W) MUMBAI 400050. PAN: AJPPM3503N VS. ITO WARD -13(2)(1) AAYAKAR BHAVAN MUMBAI-400020. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI SUMAN KUMAR (DR) DATE OF HEARING : 07.11.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29.11.2017 ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(1) OF INCOME TAX ACT PER PAWAN SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 253 OF TH E INCOME TAX ACT IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX [LD. CIT(A)] (APPEALS)-24 MUMBAI DATED 25.06.2014 FOR ASSESSMEN T YEAR (AY) 2009-10. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF AP PEAL: 1. THE LEARNED INCOME TAX OFFICER HAS ERRED IN MAKING TOTAL ADDITIONS OF RS.1350967/- TO THE TAXABLE INCOME OF YOUR APPELLANT. THE LEARNED C OMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HAS ERRED IN ACCEPTING THE SAME ADDITION OF RS.1350967/ - TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF YOUR APPELLANT. 2. ADDITIONS & DISALLOWANCES MADE BY THE LEARNED INCOM E TAX OFFICER A) UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT IN BANK A/C RS.716225/- YOUR APPELLANT HAS DEPOSITED IN ORIENTAL BANK OF CO MMERCE A/C NO 0531101100038 RS. 1133000/- AS CASH AND RS 633485/- BY CHEQUES. THE LEARNED INCOME TAX OFFICER HAS ON PRINCIPLE OF PEAK THEORY ADDED RS.716225/- TO THE INCOME. YOUR APPELLANT IS AN INDIVIDUAL CARR YING ON THE PROPRIETARY BUSINESS OF TRANSPORT CONTRACTOR AND ACTING AS AN A GENT FOR ARRANGING THE TRANSPORT OF GOODS FROM NHAVA SHEVA PORT IN NAVI MU MBAI TO THEIR CUSTOMERS DESTINATION. THE CUSTOMER USUALLY HANDOVER THE CASH OR CHEQUES TO THE TRUCK 2 ITA NO.6554/M/2014 SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR MADAN DRIVERS ON DELIVERY OF GOODS WHICH ARE DEPOSITED IN TO THE BANK A/C OF YOUR APPELLANT. CUSTOMER USUALLY GIVES THE TOTAL AMOUNT AFTER DEDUCTION OF TDS THEREON WHICH INCLUDES TRANSPORT CHARGES AND COMMIS SION OF YOUR APPELLANT HENCE THE TOTAL OF CASH AND CHEQUES DEPOSITS IN BAN K A/C ARE HIGH. THE TOTAL CONTRACT RECEIPTS AS PER 26AS ARE RS.9721818/- AND THE NET AMOUNT AFTER TDS (RS.1 073659) AMOUNT TO RS.8648159/- AND AMOUNT DEP OSITED IN THE ACCOUNTS BY CASH & CHEQUES AMOUNT TO RS.1766485/- SO THE QUE STION OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT & CHEQUE DEPOSITS DOES NOT ARISE AND THE ADD ITION SHOULD BE DELETED B) UNEXPLAINED CHEQUES CREDIT IN BANK A/C RS.200000 /- AS MENTIONED ABOVE THE LEARNED INCOME TAX OFFICER H AS ALSO ADHOC ADDED RS. 200000/- OUT OF THE CHEQUES DEPOSITED OF RS. 633485 /- AS EXPLAINED IN PARA 1 ABOVE THE CUSTOMER PAY NOT ONLY COMMISSION OF YOUR APPELLANT BUT ALSO THE TRANSPORT CHARGES WHICH ARE IN TURN PAID TO THE TRU CK OWNERS HENCE THE SAME ARE GENUINE BUSINESS RECEIPTS SO THE QUESTION OF UNEXPL AINED CHEQUES DEPOSITS DOES NOT ARISE AND THE ADDITION OF RS.200000/- SHOULD BE DELETED. C) ENHANCEMENT OF THE NET COMMISSION RS.284857/- AS STATED IN PARA '1' ABOVE CUSTOMERS USUALLY PROVI DES THE TOTAL AMOUNT TO THE DRIVER ON DELIVERY OF GOODS WHICH COMPRISES OF TRAN SPORT CHARGES AND COMMISSION OF YOUR APPELLANT. THEY DEDUCT THE TDS O N THE TOTAL AMOUNT PAID BY THE CUSTOMER. YOUR APPELLANT HAS OFFERED FOR TAX ATION THE ENTIRE NET COMMISSION OF RS.10736591- AND CLAIMED THE TDS AS R EFLECTED IN FORM 26AS. AS THE ENTIRE COMMISSION HAS BEEN OFFERED THE ENHAN CEMENT OF NET COMMISSION BY RS.284857/- IS UNJUSTIFIED. FURTHER COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF LAST 2YEARS COMMISSION OFFERED IS ENCLOSED & MARKED AS ANNEXURE - 1. D). DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES RS.25000/- THE LEARNED INCOME TAX OFFICER HAS ADHOC DISALLOWED EXPENSES OF RS.25000/- WHEREAS ALL THE EXPENSES DEBITED TO THE PROFIT AND LOSS A/C ARE EXCLUSIVELY AND ENTIRELY FOR THE BUSINESS PURPOSES ONLY. 3. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE YOUR APPELLANT WO ULD LIKE TO STATE THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS - 24) H AD STATED THAT HE WOULD CALL FOR REMAND REPORT FROM THE LEARNED INCOME TAX OFFICER HENCE YOUR APPELLANT DID NOT ATTEND BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISS IONER OF INCOME TAX AND WAITED FOR THE NOTICE. FURTHER YOUR APPELLANT IN OR DER TO JUSTIFY THE EXPENSES AND DISALLOWANCE MADE HAD APPROACHED THE LEARNED INCOME TAX OFFICER BUT THE LEARNED INCOME TAX OFFICER HAS NOT ATTENDED YOUR AP PELLANT AS THE LEARNED INCOME TAX OFFICER HAD NOT RECEIVED ANY INSTRUCTION FROM THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS -24. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED WITH THE ABOVE ADDITIONS & DISAL LOWANCES MADE BY THE LEARNED INCOME TAX OFFICER & LEARNED COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TAX (APPEALS -24). 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A TRANSPORT COMMISSION AGENT FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR RELEVANT AY O N 29.09.2009 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 3 53 981/-. THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLE TED UNDER SECTION 143(3) ON 27.12.2011. THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) WHILE PAS SING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER MADE THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CR EDIT IN BANK ACCOUNT OF RS. 3 ITA NO.6554/M/2014 SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR MADAN 7 16 225/- UNEXPLAINED CHEQUE CREDIT OF RS. 2 00 0 00/- DISALLOWED INTEREST ON LOAN FOR TRUCK OF RS. 1 24 885/- ENHANCED THE INCO ME ON COMMISSION FOR RS. 2 84 857/- AND DISALLOWED EXPENSES OF RS. 25 000/-. ON APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ALL THE ADDITION/DISALLOWANCE WERE CONFIRME D. THUS FURTHER AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE US. 3. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE DESPITE ISSU E OF NOTICE OF HEARING ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS THROUGH RPAD. WE LEFT NO OPTION EXCEPT TO HEAR THE SUBMISSIONS OF LD. DR AND TO PROCEED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 4. THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDER O F THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE ARGUED THAT THE ASSESSEE NOT COOPERATED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING NOR FURNISHED ANY REPLY/EXPLA NATION ABOUT THE DISPUTE OF VARIOUS NOTICE. THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE ACT AND THE AO MADE VARIOUS ADDITIONS. DURING THE FIRST APP ELLATE PROCEEDING THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SUBSTANTIATED ANY OF THE CLAIMS. T HUS THE ADDITION/DISALLOWANCES MADE BY AO WERE CONFIRMED. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FIL ED ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIMS. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. GROUND NO.1 RAISE D BY ASSESSEE IS GENERAL AND NEEDS NO ADJUDICATION. GROUND NO. 2A & 2B RELATES T O ADDITION OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT OF RS. 7 61 225/- AND UNEXPLAINED CHEQU E DEPOSIT OF RS. 2 00 000/-. DURING THE ASSESSMENT THE AO NOTED THAT ASSESSEE MA DE A CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 4 ITA NO.6554/M/2014 SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR MADAN 11 33 000/- IN ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE AND CHEQUE DEPOSIT OF RS. 6 33 485/-. THE AO MADE THE ADDITION ON THE PRINCIPAL OF PEAK C REDIT THEORY FOR RS. 7 16 225/- AS CASH CREDIT AND ADDITION OF RS. 2 00 000/- AS CHEQUE CREDIT. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THAT ASSES SEE IS A TRANSPORTER AND ALSO EARNING COMMISSION INCOME. THE CUSTOMERS USUALLY HA ND OVER THE CASH OR CHEQUES TO THE TRUCK DRIVERS OF GOODS WHICH ARE DEP OSITED IN THE BANK. CUSTOMER USUALLY GIVES TOTAL AMOUNT AFTER TDS WHICH INCLUDE S TRANSPORT CHARGES AND COMMISSION. THE LD. CIT(A) CONCLUDED THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED DETAILED AND DOCUMENTS. THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN THE TDS OF RS . 342193/- ON ASSET SIDE IN THE BALANCE-SHEET HOWEVER THE RECEIPT ON WHICH THE SE TDS WERE MADE DO NOT APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR IN VIEW OF RECOUR SE TO THE PROVISION OF SECTION 44AE AND YET NEVERTHELESS THE TDS ENTRY ON DEBIT I S THE ASSET SIDE OF THE BALANCE-SHEET. THUS THE FACT CLEARLY ESTABLISHED T HE CAPITAL ACCOUNT DO NOT REPRESENT THE REAL PICTURE AND SUSTAINED THE ADDITI ON. BEFORE US THE ASSESSEE NEITHER FILED ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE NOR EXPLAINE D THE FACT TO SUBSTANTIATE THE GROUND OF APPEAL. HENCE WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE FINDING OF LD. CIT(A). IN THE RESULT GROUND NO. 2(A) & 2(B ) ARE DISMISSED. 6. GROUND NO. 2(C) & 2(D) RELATES TO ENHANCEMENT OF COMMISSION INCOME AND DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES. THE AO ENHANCE THE COMMIS SION INCOME OF RS. 2 84 587/- ON THE BASIS OF DIFFERENCE CLAIMED BY AS SESSEE AND THE DETAILS AVAILABLE IN FORM 26AS. THE AO DISALLOWED THE ADHOC DISALLOWA NCE OF EXPENSES OF RS. 25 000/- IN ABSENCE OF ANY DETAILS. THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED BOTH THE ADDITION 5 ITA NO.6554/M/2014 SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR MADAN HOLDING THAT NO DETAILS WERE PROVIDED NOR THE FACTS WERE PROPERLY EXPLAINED. EVEN BEFORE US THE ASSESSEE HAS NEITHER FILED ANY DOCUM ENTARY EVIDENCE NOR EXPLAINED THE FACT. THUS WE DO NOT FIND ANY ILLEGALITY OR IN FIRMITY IN THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A). IN THE RESULT THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL NO. 2( C) & 2(D) ARE DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS DISMI SSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 29 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017. SD/- SD/- (G.S. PANNU) (PAWAN SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED 29/11/2017 S.K.PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER (ASSTT.REGISTRAR) ITAT MUMBAI 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A) MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR ITAT MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY/