TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 1039X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the Tribunal. We are of the clear view that the order impugned calls for interference. In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed and the orders passed by the Tribunal as well as the CIT-A are set aside and the assessment order stands revived. - ITAT/135/2021 IA No.GA/2/2021 - - - Dated:- 22-8-2022 - HON'BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM AND HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Appearance: Mr. Smarajit Roychowdhury, Adv. for the appellant. None .for the Respondent The Court:- This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, for brevity) is directed against the order dated 24th August, 2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, B Bench, Ko ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... addition made by the Assessing Officer in his order dated 28th March, 2013 under Section 143(3) of the Act on the ground that the claim of transport charges raised by the assessee was not genuine. The CITA in his order dated 12th March, 2015 has elaborately set out the grounds raised by the assessee before him and was of the view that when the books of accounts are not found reliable and all the expenses were found to be non-genuine, then disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) is not called for. The CITA further records that the assessee had claimed that they had carried out the transport business by hiring trucks and not through their own trucks. Therefore, the CITA came to the conclusion that it would be reasonable in the interest of natur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t business. Further, the Assessing Officer on going through the earlier records, on facts, found that the assessee had no expertise in transport business and they were not running any transport business during the earlier assessment years and it is only in the financial year 2009-10, the assessee had shown transportation charges of Rs.8,75,71,214/-. Considering this factual situation, the Assessing Officer issued notice dated 23rd July, 2020 under Section 142(1) of the Act directing the assessee to produce the books of accounts, bills and vouchers. Thereafter, the case was discussed with the assessee on ten occasions, which was followed by fresh notices dated 4th February, 2013 and 19th February, 2013 calling upon the assessee to submit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... transporting works income of Rs.8,75,71,214/-. As discussed in the Para No.2.1(c) that the assessee has not expertise in the transport work. It is also noticed that the assessee had not transport business in the preceding years. The newly made partnership deed also not mentioned this transporting business except the civil engineering business. The assessee also failed to prove the identity, genuineness of the payments and the creditworthiness of the transporters in spite of given several opportunities. The assessee also failed to submit the details of work done during the financial year 2009-10. Therefore, the said expenditure is not genuine expenditure whether it is incurred or not. Since the assessee failed to provide the details of work ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer was not dislodged. The Tribunal was of the view that the CITA has exercised his powers which are coterminous to that of the powers of the Assessing Officer. However, on going through the order passed by the CITA, we find that there is no such exercise done by the CITA and all that is observed is that it would be reasonable and in the interest of principles of natural justice to estimate the profit at 12%. In the absence of any reasons given by the CITA, we are of the view that the order suffers from perversity which has been perpetuated by the order passed by the Tribunal. Thus, for the above reasons, we are of the clear view that the order impugned calls for interference. In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
