Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai

Nitin R. Shenoy, Thane vs Acit Cir 3, Thane on 2 November, 2018

ITA.No.5844/Mum/2015 Nitin R. Shenoy Assessment Year 2009-10 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "बी" ायपीठ मुंबई म ।

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "B" BENCH, MUMBAI माननीय ी महावीर िसं ह, ाियक सद एवं माननीय ी मनोज कुमार अ वाल, ले खा सद के सम ।

BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND HON'BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5844/Mum/2015 (िनधा रण वष / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Nitin R. Shenoy Assistant Commissioner of 602, Jaltarang, Lok Puram बनाम/ Income Tax, Circle-3 Off. Pokharan Road No.2 Thane Thane(W ) - 400 604 Vs. थायीले खासं ./जीआइआरसं ./PAN/GIR No. ANOPS-9792-E (अ पीलाथ"/Appellant) : (#$थ" / Respondent) Assessee by : C.V.Dharkar, Ld. AR Revenue by : D.G.Pansari, Ld. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 17/10/2018 Date of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 02/11/2018 Date of Pronouncement आदे श / O R D E R Per Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year [AY] 2009-10 contest the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-2 [CIT(A)], Thane, Appeal No.062/11-12 dated 30/10/2015 qua confirmation of certain additions. The assessment for impugned AY was framed by Ld. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Thane [AO] u/s 143(3) on 28/12/2011 wherein the income of the assessee was 2 ITA.No.5844/Mum/2015 Nitin R. Shenoy Assessment Year 2009-10 assessed at Rs.84.35 Lacs after certain additions as against returned income of Rs.63.57 Lacs filed by the assessee on 19/09/2009.

2. Upon perusal of grounds of appeal, we find that following additions are the subject matter of present appeal:-

No. Nature of Additions Amount (Rs.)

1. Unconfirmed Sundry Creditors 12,90,445/-

2. Mismatch in Figures 19,205/-

3. Unproven Expenses 4,60,925/-

The addition on account of Sundry Creditors has been made since the assessee could not file the confirmations thereof. The amount of Rs.19,205/- represent mismatch in confirmation figures of a supplier namely Osram whereas the addition of unproven expenses is adhoc disallowance of 15% against certain expenses as claimed by the assessee. The same, upon confirmation by Ld. CIT(A), are under appeal before us.

3. The Ld. Auhtorized Representative for Assessee [AR], Shri C.V.Dharkar on the strengths of the documents as placed in the papar- book agitated the additions confirmed by first appellate authority which has been controverted by Ld. Departmental Representative [DR], Shri D.G.Pansari.

4.1 So far as the additions of Rs.12.90 Lacs on account of unconfirmed Sundry Creditors is concerned, the perusal of documents placed in the paper book, prima-facie, reveal that most of these Sundry Creditors has been settled by the assessee in subsequent years either by way of payment from Bank or by way of issuance of credit / debit notes which demonstrate that the liabilities in that respect had not 3 ITA.No.5844/Mum/2015 Nitin R. Shenoy Assessment Year 2009-10 ceased to exist within the meaning of Section 41(1) and the additions thereof were not justified. In the light of aforesaid fact, the matter stands restored to Ld. AO for appreciation of these documentary evidences and re-adjudicate the same as per law after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee failing which Ld. AO shall be at liberty to adjudicate the same on the basis of material available on record. This ground stand allowed for statistical purposes. 4.2 Similarly, it appears that the mismatch in figures of Osram arises out of the fact that some credit notes / debit notes have not been considered by the parties. The reconciliation of the same has been placed in the paper-book. Therefore, this issue also stands remitted back to the file of Ld. AO with a direction to the assessee to reconcile the same and substantiate the liability. This ground also stands allowed for statistical purposes.

4.3 This last addition is nothing but adhoc disallowance of 15% against certain expenses aggregating to Rs.30,72,823/- since the assessee could not file sufficient documentary evidences to substantiate the same. The details of these items have already been given at para 5 of the quantum assessment order. One of the item is Sales Promotion Expenses of Rs.10,62,090/-. The perusal of computation of income reveal that the assessee has already offered suo-moto disallowance of 10% against the same and therefore, further addition against the same was not justified and hence, the impugned addition against the same stands deleted. Regarding balance expenses of Rs.20,10,733/-, we restrict the impugned additions to 10% which comes to Rs.2,01,073/-. This ground stand partly allowed.

Nitin R. Shenoy Assessment Year 2009-10

5. Resultantly, the appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order.

Order pronounced in the open court on 2nd November, 2018.

         Sd/-                                          Sd/-
     (Mahavir Singh)                           (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal)

ाियक सद  / Judicial Member                लेखा सद  / Accountant Member

मुं बई Mumbai; िदनां क Dated : 02/11/2018 Sr.PS:-Thirumalesh/Jv, Sr.PS आदे शकी ितिलिपअ!े िषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :

1. अपीलाथ"/ The Appellant

2. #$थ"/ The Respondent

3. आयकरआयु*(अपील) / The CIT(A)

4. आयकरआयु*/ CIT- concerned

5. िवभागीय#ितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, मुं बई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai

6. गाड/ फाईल / Guard File आदे शानु सार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायकपं जीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, मुं बई / ITAT, Mumbai