Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 3]

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai

Parmes Diamonds Exports P. Ltd, Mumbai vs Acit Cen Cir 1(2), Mumbai on 21 December, 2017

आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, मुंबई यायपीठ,सी,मुंबई ।

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES "C", MUMBAI ी जो ग दर संह, या यक सद य एवं ी रिमत कोचर, लेखा सद य, के सम Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Ramit Kochar, Accountant Member ITA NO.2016/Mum/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Parmes Diamonds Exports ACIT, Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Central Circle-1(2), 2205 Panchratna, 22nd Floor, Old. C.G.O. Building, M.P. Marg, Opera House, Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400004 Mumbai-400020 ( नधा रती /Assessee) (राज व /Revenue) PAN. No.AAACP2104P नधा रती क ओर से / Assessee by Shri Manan Mathuria राज व क ओर से / Revenue by Shri H.N.Singh CIT-DR ु वाई क$ तार%ख / Date of Hearing :

    सन                                           21/12/2017

    आदे श क$ तार%ख /Date of Order:               21/12/2017
                                 2         Parmes Diamonds Exports Pvt. Ltd.
                                                ITA No.2016/Mum/2016




                      आदे श / O R D E R

Per Joginder Singh (Judicial Member) The assessee is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 21/01/2016 of the Ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai, confirming the disallowance to the tune of Rs.1,82,609/-, being 5% of vehicle expenses and miscellaneous expenses, on ad-hoc basis.

2. During hearing, Shri Manan Mathuria, ld. counsel for the assessee, advanced arguments, which is identical to the ground raised by submitting that ad-hoc addition has been made by the Assessing Officer, which is highly excessive. On the other hand, Shri H.N. Singh, Ld. CIT-DR, defended the impugned order. 2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The facts, in brief, are that the assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing and exporting of diamonds and also providing job work. A search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act) was carried out by the Investigation wing in the case of Mahindra 3 Parmes Diamonds Exports Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.2016/Mum/2016 Brothers Exports Pvt. Ltd., associate concern of the assessee, Directors, and related person from the group. A survey action 133A of the Act was also carried out upon the assessee on 08/08/2011. The assessee declared total income of Rs.83,01,565/- u/s 139(1) of the Act on 25/09/2012 and the assessment was completed at a loss of Rs.88,49,390/- after making disallowance of Rs.5,47,827/-. The assessee, during the year incurred an amount of Rs.2,58,960/- towards motor car out of which the Ld. Assessing Officer disallowed an amount of Rs.38,844/-, being 15% of the vehicle expenses. The assessee also incurred an amount of Rs.33,93,224/- towards tea and sundry expenses. The Ld. Assessing Officer disallowed an amount of Rs.5,08,983/-, being 15%, out of these sundry expenses on ad-hoc basis. On appeal before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), the submission of the assessee was considered and the disallowance was restricted to 5% of such expenses (Rs.36,52,184/-) granting relief of Rs.34,69,575/-. The assessee is still aggrieved and is in appeal before this Tribunal. Considering the totality of facts, we find that the 4 Parmes Diamonds Exports Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.2016/Mum/2016 vehicle expenses, tea and sundry expenses were supported by bills and vouchers. Admittedly, the burden is upon the assessee to furnish necessary evidence to substantiate the claim. To put an end to the litigation, we deem it appropriate to reduce the addition to Rs.1 lakh out of Rs.1,82,609/- sustained by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as the personal use of these expenses cannot be ruled out. Thus, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.

Finally, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. This Order was pronounced in the open court in the presence of ld. representative of both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 21/12/2017.

             Sd/-                                           Sd/-

       (Ramit Kochar)                               (Joginder Singh)
लेखा सद#य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER               या$यक सद#य / JUDICIAL MEMBER

   मब

ंु ई Mumbai; 'दनांक Dated : 21/12/2017 f{x~{tÜ? P.S/. न.स.

5 Parmes Diamonds Exports Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.2016/Mum/2016 आदे श क %$त'ल(प अ)े(षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :

1. अपीलाथ, / The Appellant
2. -.यथ, / The Respondent.
3. आयकर आय0 ु त(अपील) / The CIT, Mumbai.
4. आयकर आय0 ु त / CIT(A)- , Mumbai
5. 2वभागीय - त न ध, आयकर अपील%य अ धकरण, मब ुं ई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai
6. गाड फाईल / Guard file.

आदे शानस ु ार/ BY ORDER, स.या2पत - त //True Copy// उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, मब ुं ई / ITAT, Mumbai