Manish Subodhchandra Shah, Ahmedabad vs Assessee

सम ी जी.डी.अ वाल, उपा य (अहम. े ) एवं ी कुल भारत, या यक सद य । BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGARWAL,VICE PRESIDENT (AZ) And SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2521/Ahd/2011 ( नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Manish Subodhchandra Shah बनाम/ The ITO C/o. Popatlal Amthalal Shah Vs. Ward-11(1) th 6AB, 7 Floor Ahmedabad Sumeru Park Prabhat Society, Paldi Ahmedabad-380 007 थायी ले खा सं . /जीआइआर सं . / PAN/GIR No. : ACUPS 1947 A (अपीलाथ( /Appellant) .. ()*यथ( / Respondent)

अपीलाथ( ओर से / Appellant by : Shri D.K. Parikh, AR )*यथ( क, ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Dinesh Singh, Sr.DR

ु वाई क, तार/ख / सन Date of Hearing 03/06/2015 घोषणा क, तार/ख /Date of Pronounce ment 05/06/2015

आदे श / O R D E R

PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER :

This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-XVI, Ahmedabad ('CIT(A)' in short) dated 08/08/2011 pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2008-09. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-

ITA No.2521/Ahd/2011 Manish Subodhchandra Shah vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2008-09 -2-

1.1. The order passed u/s.250 on 8.8.2011 for AY 2008-09 by CIT(A)-

XVI, Abad, upholding the disallowance of Rs.1,58,100 is wholly illegal, unlawful and against the principles of natural justice. 1.2. The Ld.CIT(A) has grievously erred in law and or on facts in not considering fully and properly the submissions made and evidence produced by the appellant.

2.1. The Ld.CIT(A) has grievously erred in law and on facts in confirming the disallowance of Rs.1,58,100, out of freight expenses.

2.2. That in the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Ld.CIT(A) ought not to have upheld the disallowance of Rs.1,58,100.

It is, therefore, prayed that the disallowance upheld by the CIT(A) may kindly be deleted.

2. The only effective ground is against confirming the disallowance of Rs.1,58,100/-.

2.1. Briefly stated facts are that the case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny assessment and the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was framed vide order dated 22/12/2010, thereby the Assessing Officer (AO in short) made disallowance of Rs.1,58,100/- claimed on account of railway nor-octroi expenses. Against the said assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A), who after considering the submissions, dismissed the appeal of the Assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), now the assessee is in appeal before us.

ITA No.2521/Ahd/2011 Manish Subodhchandra Shah vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2008-09 -3-

3. The ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that the authorities below were not justified in making the disallowance and confirming the same. He submitted that the reasoning for disallowance is unjustified. He submitted that the AO has not doubted the books of account and proceeded to make disallowance on the basis of conjectures and surmises which is not permissible under the law.

3.1. On the contrary, ld.sr.DR supported the orders of the authorities below.

4. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the AO made disallowance on the basis that in similar line of business, the expenditure claimed by the assessee was at higher side, therefore he proceeded to make disallowance. The ld.CIT(A) confirmed the same. However, before the authorities below, the assessee has submitted all the details with regard to expenditure. The ld.CIT(A) has although recorded the fact that the assessee has produced vouchers, yet he confirmed the disallowance on the basis that the payments were made in cash. The authorities below have not doubted the vouchers submitted by the assessee, even no enquiry is made with regard to the such vouchers and the authorities below have proceeded on the basis of presumption which in our considered view is not justified. Therefore we ITA No.2521/Ahd/2011 Manish Subodhchandra Shah vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2008-09 -4-

hereby direct the AO to delete the disallowance of Rs.1,58,100/-. Thus, the ground raised by the Assessee is allowed.

5. In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the Court on Friday, the 5th day of June, 2015 at Ahmedabad.

Sd/- Sd/- (जी.डी.अ वाल) (कुल भारत) उपा य (अहम. े ) या यक सद य ( G.D. AGARWAL ) ( KUL BHARAT ) VICE PRESIDENT (AZ) JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 5/ 06 /2015 ट/.सी.नायर, व. न.स./T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS

आदे श क! " त$ल%प अ&े%षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :

1. अपीलाथ( / The Appellant

2. )*यथ( / The Respondent.

3. संब8ं धत आयकर आय:

ु त / Concerned CIT

4. आयकर आय:

ु त(अपील) / The CIT(A)-XVI, Ahmedabad

5. ;वभागीय ) त न8ध, आयकर अपील/य अ8धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad

6. गाड= फाईल / Guard file.

आदे शानुसार/ BY ORDER,

स*या;पत ) त //True Copy// उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad

1. Date of dictation .. 3.6.15 (dictation-pad 4+ pages attached at the end of this File)

2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member .. 4.6.15

3. Other Member...

4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S.................

5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement......

6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S.......5.6.2015

7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk.....................5.6.2015

8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk..........................................

9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order..........................

10. Date of Despatch of the Order..................