9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 1467X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peals, the assessee has raised similar grounds. For reference, the grounds raised by the assessee in the appeal for the assessment year 2008-09 are reproduced as under:- "(1) The C.I.T (A) failed to appreciate that both the additions made by the A.C.I.T in the assessment order passed by him for Asst. Year 2008-09 were directly contrary to binding judicial orders of the Appellate Tribunal and the Hon'ble Court passed in the Appellant's own case which unequivocally held that no addition could be made to the Appellant's income either on the ground of non-reconciliation of the Appellant's fees with the Form 26 AS (Tax Deduction Certificates), nor under section 14A read with Rule 8D. The said judicial orders of the High Court and Tribunal in the Appellant's own case are as under: - (a) Order of Appellate Tribunal dated 3.12.2020 in A.Ys 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2012-13, 2013-14 holding that no addition can be made to the Appellant's income u/s 14A read with Rule 8D. (b) Order of High Court 18.3.2014 ITA No 1930 of 2011 upholding order of Appellate Tribunal for Asst. Year 2006-07 ITA NO. 527/mum/2010 dated 8.12.2010. holding that no addition can be made to the Appellant's ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1,71,47,470. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. During the hearing, the assessee, appearing in-person, submitted that all the professional fees of the assessee are received by way of cheque and are deposited only in one bank account. It was further submitted that there is no allegation that the assessee has received any professional fees in cash. The assessee submitted that similar addition was deleted by the Tribunal in assessee's own case for the assessment year 2006-07. It was further submitted that the professional income declared by the assessee in its return of income in both years is far in excess of the professional fees as per the AIR information. 7. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative vehemently relied upon the order of the lower authorities. 8. We have considered the submissions of both sides and perused the material available on record. As per the assessee, since he is a Senior Advocate, he can appear before the Courts/Tribunals/other judicial authorities only if instructed by an Advocate or a Chartered Accountant. Further, the assessee claimed that he send his memo of fees only to the instructing Advocate/Chartered Accoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om the clients directly or from the Instructing advocates or CAs, if they have collected the amounts from the clients and since no other bank account is maintained by him wherein professional fees are deposited and since the amount returned in the audited accounts is more than the fees as per the AIR information; therefore, no addition is called for. 8.2 We find sufficient force in the above submissions of the assessee. Admittedly, the revenue has not controverted the submissions of the assessee before the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings as well as remand proceedings that all professional fees received are by way of cheques and all such cheques have been deposited in his Oriental Bank of Commerce Account, South Extension Branch, New Delhi (vide letter addressed to Assessing Officer on 8.10.208). Therefore, in absence of any contrary material brought by the revenue authorities that the assessee has received amount more than the professional fees than what has been declared by him, no addition should have been made. It is also a fact that the professional income declared by the assessee far exceeds the professional fees as per AIR information. There may be so ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cepted by the Tribunal once again. Since it is accepted for the Assessment Year 2006-07, in the peculiar facts, in relation to the present assessee, we are of the view that this appeal does not deserve to be entertained. It does not give rise to any substantial question of law." 11. The learned Departmental Representative could not show any reason to deviate from the aforesaid order and no change in facts and law was alleged in the relevant assessment year. The issue arising in the present appeal is recurring in nature and has been decided in favour of the assessee by the coordinate bench of the Tribunal in the preceding assessment year. It is evident from the record that the learned CIT(A) though took note of the aforesaid decisions rendered in assessee's own case, however decided not to follow the same without pointing out any change in facts vis-à-vis the year under consideration. Since in the year under consideration, the impugned addition is made only due to non-reconciliation of professional receipts as per the AIR information with reference to assessee's books of accounts and bank statement, therefore, respectfully following the aforesaid decisions rendered in assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) 15. Thus, if the AO is not satisfied with the correctness of the claim of the assessee in respect of expenditure incurred in relation to income which does not form part of the total income, after having regard to the accounts of the assessee, the AO can determine the amount of such expenditure. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. Vs DCIT [2017] 394 ITR 449 (SC), observed as under: "37. We do not see how in the aforesaid fact situation a different view could have been taken for the Assessment Year 2002-2003. Sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules merely prescribe a formula for determination of expenditure incurred in relation to income which does not form part of the total income under the Act in a situation where the Assessing Officer is not satisfied with the claim of the assessee. Whether such determination is to be made on application of the formula prescribed under Rule 8D or in the best judgment of the Assessing Officer, what the law postulates is the requirement of a satisfaction in the Assessing Officer that having regard to the accounts of the assessee, as placed before him, it is not possibl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
