9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 421X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e for allowing any further relief to the assessee. Accordingly uphold the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue and dismiss this appeal filed by the assessee. -Decided against assessee. - I.T.A. No. 532/Kol/2018 - - - Dated:- 5-9-2018 - Mr. Shri P.M. Jagtap, J. For The Assessee : Shri Akkal Dudhuwewala, FCA appearing For The Revenue : Shri Biswanath Das, Addl. CIT ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT (Appeals) 11, Kolkata dated 25. 01. 2018 and the solitary issue involved therein relates to the addition of ₹ 6, 06, 000/- sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) out of sales promotion expenses. 2. The assessee in the present case is an individual who is an LIC agent. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by him on 23. 09. 2013. In the profit and loss account filed along with the said return, a sum of ₹ 17, 82, 474/- was debited by the assessee on account of business promotion expenses. In this regard, it was explained by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings before the A. O. that he had purchased 246 silver coins each weighing 100 grams from M/s. Soumya Busi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed by the A. O. u/s 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) and after considering the submissions made by the assessee as well as the material available on record, the Ld. CIT(A) restricted the disallowance of ₹ 15, 10, 354/- out of sales promotion expenses to ₹ 6, 06, 000/- for the following reasons given in his impugned order: 4 . 4 I have gone through the assessment order, the submissions made by the appellant and the material on record . There are some important facts that need to be brought into perspective . The appellant has submitted certain documents during the appellate proceedings, amongst which a letter 15/01/16 written by the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax to the Asstt . Commissioner of Income Tax, Cir- 37, Kolkata i . e . the A . O . in this case . In the said letter the Dy . Commissioner of Sales Tax has made a mention of certain facts which are, among others, as under: 4 . 4a . . . . . . 2a . From the return uploaded by the dealer Sl . No . 47 Information on issue and receipt of tax invoices, the dealer has declared that in the tax period 201209 . Tax invoices ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th the details provided by the appellant, certain issues are noted. These are: i . The serial numbers of tax invoices by Soumya Business in its VAT Return are different from those mentioned on the Tax Invoices presented by the appellant . AS can be observed, as per the Tax Invoice submitted by the appellant, the invoice numbers are169 and 174 for the month of November 2012, 186 in the month of December 2012 and 191t in the month of January 2013 . However, as per the information received from the Dy . Commissioner of Sales Tax, the Tax Invoice numbers issued and reported by Soumya Business are: 231 to 286 in November 2012 and 287 to 336 in the month of December 2012 . ii . The prices of one gram of silver were different November 2012 and in January 2013 . This has been checked with certain websites . Thus, on 02 . 11 . 2012 the price of one gram of silver remained around Rs . 53 . 47, on 20 . 11 . 2012, it was around 58 . 72 and at 54 . 15 on 02 . 01 . 2013(Source:https://www . bullionates . com/silver/INR/2012-11-history . htm) . Thus, under no circumstance could the price of silver have remained the same as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oduced by the appellant are not genuine. b. The rates of silver is stated to be the same on 20th November 2012 and on 2nd January 2013. This however, is far from being true. c. The proprietor of Soumya Business has been found by the Sales Tax Department to be indulging in issuing fake bills and that the Sales Tax Department has initiated against him. d. The proprietor of Soumya Business is absconding. 4. 4e. In view, the A. O. has been reasonable enough to allow the appellant an amount of 9, 04, 354/- which was mentioned in the VAT Return filed by Soumya Business even though the Tax Invoice numbers did not match. Therefore, the action of the A. O. in disallowing an amount of ₹ 6, 06, 000/- is upheld. This ground of appeal is, consequently dismissed. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal. 4. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is having substantial business as an LIC agent and during the year under consideration, 300 new policies were issued by him and the total commission of more than ₹ 1 crore was earned by him. He submitted that 246 silver coins were distribut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as other adverse findings recorded by the A. O. , the Ld. CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee to the extent of ₹ 9, 04, 354/- under a wrong impression that the A. O. himself had allowed the same. He contended that the assessee has already got more than reasonable relief from the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue and he does not deserve any further relief. 6. I have considered the rival submissions and also perused the relevant material available on record. As rightly contended by the learned DR, specific adverse findings and observations were recorded by the A. O. on the basis of enquiry conducted by him while verifying the claim of the assessee of having distributed 246 silver coins amongst the policy holders. As revealed from the enquiry made by the A. O. from the concerned VAT authority, the supplier of the said coins, M/s. Soumya Business was indulging in issuing fake bills. Moreover, out of the four bills claimed to be raised by the said supplier on the assessee, only the sale to the extent of two bills was disclosed by it in the relevant VAT return. Even the bill nos. declared in the said VAT return were not matching with the bill nos. raised on the assessee. The assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
