2008 (7) TMI 848 - HC - Income Tax

Whether the Tribunal was justified in granting relief allowing the expenditure of ₹ 8,67,600 based on the reasonings assigned by it while considering the similar expenditure for the previous assessment year 1993-94 ? Held that - Even if the assessee has produced any document to show that it has purchased the papers worth ₹ 8,67,600 for the assessment year 1994-95, it is for the Assessing Officer to reconsider the case of the assessee. Since such an opportunity was not given for the Assessing Officer to consider these document, since the assessee did not produce these documents for the reasons best known to it, we have no other option that to answer the question in favour of the Revenue and remand the matter to the Assessing Officer to reconsider the issue by giving opportunity for the assessee. Appeal is allowed. The order passed by all the authorities are set aside in regard to the disallowance of expenditure claimed by the assessee in a sum of ₹ 8,67,600 on account of the paper purchased by it from Shri Krishna Paper Concern, Calcutta, and the matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.

Summary

Issues:
Disallowed expenditure for purchase of map litho paper, Appeal before Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Appeal before Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Substantial questions of law raised by Revenue, Reframing of questions of law, Justification of Tribunal in granting relief, Error in Tribunal's decision, Assessment of documents produced by assessee, Remand to Assessing Officer.

Disallowed Expenditure:
The appeal involved the disallowance of expenditure claimed by the assessee for the purchase of map litho paper. The Assessing Officer disallowed the expenditure of Rs. 8,76,600, as the representative of the assessee failed to provide evidence supporting the claim. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) partially allowed the appeal but confirmed the disallowance for paper purchase. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal considered the issue for various assessment years and allowed the expenditure based on documents produced by the assessee for the previous year.

Substantial Questions of Law:
The Revenue raised substantial questions of law regarding the genuineness of purchases made by the assessee from a specific concern and the Tribunal's justification in granting relief based on similar expenditure in the previous assessment year. The Tribunal's decision was questioned for treating the purchases as genuine without concrete evidence of delivery of goods and for not discussing documents supporting the paper purchase.

Reframing of Questions of Law:
During the hearing, the questions of law framed by the Revenue were reframed to focus on whether the Tribunal was justified in granting relief based on reasoning from the previous year. The Tribunal's decision-making process was under scrutiny for allowing the appeal solely on the grounds of relief granted in a previous assessment year without proper discussion or justification for the current year's expenditure.

Error in Tribunal's Decision:
The High Court found a grave error in the Tribunal's decision to grant relief to the assessee without proper reasoning or discussion on the documents presented for the current assessment year. The Tribunal's reliance on relief granted for the previous year was deemed unacceptable, emphasizing the need for a separate assessment based on the evidence provided for the specific year in question.

Assessment of Documents:
The counsel for the assessee claimed that relevant records were produced to prove the purchase of papers from Shri Krishna Paper Concern. However, the assessment order indicated a lack of evidence provided by the assessee to support the claim. The High Court highlighted the contradiction between the claims made by the assessee and the lack of evidence presented during the assessment.

Remand to Assessing Officer:
Ultimately, the High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the orders of all authorities regarding the disallowance of the expenditure for paper purchase. The matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration, allowing the assessee to submit any relevant documents for review. The decision emphasized the Assessing Officer's role in reevaluating the case based on the newly presented evidence and in accordance with the law.