9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 896X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0% on account of payment of speed money, is perverse as the same is duly supported by the documentary evidence - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA Nos.170&171/Bang/2023 - - - Dated:- 25-5-2023 - SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, A.R. For the Respondent : Shri Bipin C.N., D.R. ORDER PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: These appeals by assessee are directed against order of NFAC for the assessment years 2015-16 2016-17 dated 16.1.2023 and 25.1.2023 respectively. These appeals are common in nature except change in figures and hence, these are clubbed together, heard together and disposed of by this common order for the sake ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f income was picked up for scrutiny assessment, and the statutory notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued, calling for various details and documentary evidence. In response thereto, the Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee appeared before the AO from time to time and furnished the requisite details and documentary evidence called for. Accordingly, after having perused the details and documentary evidence furnished by the assessee, the AO framed the impugned order u/s. 143(3) of the Act dated 22.12.2017/-, determining the total loss of the assessee at (-) Rs. 7,58,551/-. While doing so, the AO made the following additions to the loss returned. Sr. No. Particulars of addition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 1,74,38,149/- Rs. 17,43,815/- 3 2008-09 Rs. 35,52,611/- Rs. 3,55,261/- 4 2009-10 Rs. 40,40,000/- Rs. 4,04,000/- 5 2010-11 Rs. 33,27,170/- Rs. 3,32,717/- 6 2011-12 Rs. 50,71,250/- Rs. 5,07,125/- 7. 2012-13 Rs. 1,81,74,006/- Rs. 4,54,350/- (Restricted to 2.5%) 8 2013-14 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ement of the AO in the first page of the order shows that he has opened the file with pre-determined mind that assessee has inflated the expenditure. It was so alleged by the AO even without rejecting the books of accounts. Before making allegation that assessee has inflated expenditure, it is incumbent upon the AO to reject the audited books of accounts maintained by the assessee, he should challenge the entries in the books of accounts by duly rejecting the same. In other words, it is evident that the AO considered the income declared by the assessee, thereafter, he made disallowances of expenditure after accepting the books of accounts. The total disallowance made by the AO is only on conjectures and surmises. The claim of labour charges ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment years 2007-08 to 2011-12 and 2.5% in assessment years 2012-13 2013-14 was sustained. This act of Ld. CIT(A) is not justified. In our opinion, the impugned expenditure in fact claimed to have been incurred by the assessee wholly and exclusively for the purpose of its business and it cannot be said that this expenditure is bogus or fictitious and cannot be said that it has not been incurred by the assessee for the purpose of business. We do not see remotely there is any mention of rationale in arriving at the percentage of disallowance in the present case, and secondly, we find force in the claim of assessee that devoid of any specific infirmity in the books of accounts of the assessee, disallowance of labour charges expenditure ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cash vouchers which showed that the payment was made by cash to each gang leader and the identity of the gang leader is not verifiable and the recipients are not assessee's employees. The aforesaid finding has been affirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as by the Tribunal. However, it is pertinent to note that the books of accounts have not been touted by any of the authorities under the Act. A Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 24.03.2015 passed in ITA No.22/2015, has held that admittedly the normal practice in the line of business of the assessee is to pay certain extra amounts to port labourers as speed money for promptly and speedily carrying out the labour work of handling cargo beyond working hours and h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
