Pradeep Agarwal / Shubpradheep ... vs Assessee

I .T.A . N o. 17 44 / KOL ./ 20 1 2 As ses sm e nt y e ar : 20 08 - 20 0 9

Page 1 of 3

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA 'SM C' BENCH, KOLKATA

Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial M ember

I.T .A. No . 174 4 /KOL/ 2 01 2 Assess ment year : 2008 -2 00 9

Prad eep A ga rwa l/ Shub p rad he ep A ga rwal,.. ........ ...............Ap p ella nt 1, British Ind ia n Street, 5 t h Floor, Roo m N o. 503, Kol ka ta -700 069 [PA N : A CHPA 4722 G]

-Vs.- Income Ta x Offic er,........ .............................. ........ ...................Resp ond e nt Wa rd -54(1), Kolka ta , 3, Gove rnment Pla c e(West), Kol ka ta -700 001

Appeara nces by : N o n e, f or the as sessee Shri K.L. Kanak, JCIT, Sr. D.R., for th e Department

Dat e of concluding t he hearin g : Feb ruary 23, 2015 Dat e of pr onouncing th e order : Feb ruary 23, 2015

Per Ge orge M athan:

This is an app eal filed by the assess ee a gain st th e order of ld. Commissioner of In co me Tax ( Appeals)-XXXVI, Kolkata in Appeal No. 186/CIT(A)-XXXVI /Kol/ITO-Wd-54(1 )/1 0-11 /1415 dated 3 0.10.2012 for the a sse ss ment year 2008-09.

2. An ad jo urnm ent letter has been filed on beh alf of the assess ee wherein ld . A.R. o f the ass ess ee ha s so ught fo r more time to prepare and submit the p ap er b ook. As the matt er has be en post ed on multiple d ates and till today no pap er b ook h as been filed and only adjourn ment h as been sought, the adjou rn me nt applic ation filed by the asses see stands rejected and the app eal dispos ed of on merit.

3. Sh ri K.L. Kanak, JCIT, Sr. D.R. rep re sented on beh alf of th e R evenue.

I .T.A . N o. 17 44 / KOL ./ 20 1 2 As ses sm e nt y e ar : 20 08 - 20 0 9

Page 2 of 3

4. In the asse ssee's appeal, th e as ses se e has raised the fo llo win g grounds:-

(1) Th at o n th e facts and in the cir cu mstances of th e ca se, the ld. In come Tax Officer and the ld . CIT(Ap peals) erred in r efusing to a llow credit for TDS of Rs.2 0,600/- which formed a pa rt of the total income offered fo r taxation for the p res en t a ss essm ent year 2 008-09 and taxed accordingly.

(2) That, on the facts and in the cir cumstances of th e case, the Ass essin g Officer err ed in disallowing th e a mount of Rs.2,00,000/- paid o n GRG Bu ild Well Private L td. in a n ea rlier assessmen t year, but debi ted to P rofit & Loss Account for this y ear, whi ch amoun t had been paid in connection with th e earning of professional fees of Rs.6,50,000/-, pa rt of which was also bro ught to tax in this year.

5. At the time of hearin g, it was sub mitted by the ld. Sr. D.R. that the as se sse e i s an individual, who is a p rof es sional Cha rtered Accountant. It was th e submis sion that the asses se e had cl ai med c redit o f TD S of Rs. 20,600/- representin g the payment from M/s. Tirupati A ss et s Pvt. Ltd. of an amount of R s.2,00,000/-. It was the submi ssio n that the a sse ss ee had not offered th e amount of Rs.2,00, 000/- as his income durin g the rel evant y ear and con seq uently the A ss essin g Of ficer had not allo wed the ben efit of the credit o f TD S. It was the furthe r submission by the ld. Sr. D.R. that in resp ect of G ro und No . 2 , the assessee h ad clai m ed an expendi ture of Rs.2 ,00,000/- being pai d to M/s. GRG Build Well Private Ltd. toward s f amily settlemen t. It wa s t he submi ssion that th e s ame was a perso nal exp enditure and was not liable to be allowed.

6. I have consid ered the submis sion of t he ld. Sr. D. R, peru sed th e as se ssm ent ord e r an d the o rd er of the l d. CIT(Appeals). In respect of the Gro und No . 1 repres entin g th e credit o f TDS of R s.20, 600/-, it is n oticed that the As ses sin g Offic er say s th at t he ass essee has not off ered the amount of Rs.2,00,00 0/- as inco me. However, it is noticed th at the I .T.A . N o. 17 44 / KOL ./ 20 1 2 As ses sm e nt y e ar : 20 08 - 20 0 9

Page 3 of 3

Assessing Of ficer ha s mention ed the total rec eipt mad e fro m M/ s. Tiru pati Assets Pvt. Ltd. as R s.6, 50,000/- which in cludes th e amount of Rs. 2,00,000/-. Admittedly in re sp ect o f the G rou nd No. 2, the amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- has been paid to M/s. GRG Build Well Privat e L td. in resp ect of th e f amily settle ment and the s ame h as been clai med again st the p rofessional f ees received Rs.6 ,50,000/- from M/ s. Tirupati A ss et s Pvt. Ltd. This is as pe r the assessmen t orde r. This sho ws that th e two transaction s seem to b e in ter-conn ect ed but as the fact s a re clearly no t em an atin g f ro m the assessm ent o rder or the o rde r of the ld. CIT(App eals), both thes e i ssu es are li able to be restored to th e fil e of the Assessing Of ficer fo r re-adjud ication aft er gran tin g the asses sse adequate opportunity to sub stanti ate its cas e and I do so.

7. In th e result, th e appeal filed b y the asses see is allowed for stati stic al pu rpose s.

Orde r p ronounced in th e open Co urt on 23 r d Febru a ry, 2 015.

Sd /-

George Mathan (Judicial M embe r) Kolkata, th e 23 r d day of F ebruary, 2015 Co pies to : (1) Prad eep A ga rwa l/ Shub p rad he ep A ga rwal, 1, British Ind ia n Street, 5 t h Floor, Roo m N o. 503, Kol ka ta -700 069

(2) Income Ta x Offic er, Wa rd -54(1), Kolka ta , 3, Gove rnment Pla c e(West), Kol ka ta -700 001

(3) Comm iss ioner of Income-tax (Appeal s) (4) Com mis sioner of Incom e Tax (5) The Depar tmental R epr es entative (6) Guard Fil e By order

Assistant Registrar Income Tax App ellate Tribunal Kolkata ben ch es, Kolkata Laha/Sr. P.S.