Bijal Dhiman Vyas v. DCIT, Circle-10, Ahmedabad
[Citation -2019-LL-0916-174]

Citation 2019-LL-0916-174
Appellant Name Bijal Dhiman Vyas
Respondent Name DCIT, Circle-10, Ahmedabad
Court ITAT-Ahmedabad
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 16/09/2019
Assessment Year 2010-11
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags unexplained cash credit • adequate opportunity • deduction of tax • contract receipt • unexplained loan • labour expenses
Bot Summary: The AO has made various disallowance and total income was assessed at Rs. 76,11,303/- as against return of income of Rs. 22,00,500/- filed by the assessee. During the course of assessment the AO noticed that assessee has shown Rs. 6,53,44,578/- as contract receipt as per Form No. 26AS the gross contract receipt was shown at Rs. 6,62,87,189/-. The AO has stated that assessee has neither furnished any detail now any reconciliation therefore, difference of Rs. 9,42,611/- including receipt of interest from Bank of India amounting to Rs. 52,914/- was added to the total income of the assessee. Regarding addition of Rs. 8,00,000/- under the head unexplained cash credit, the AO noticed that assessee has claimed an amount of Rs. 8,00,000/- as unexplained loan from Rathi Sir. In respect of disallowance out of labour expenses of Rs. 33,19,460/- the AO noticed that assessee has paid Rs. 4,24,41,725/- towards labour expense without deduction of tax and the assessee has not submitted supporting voucher in respect of incurring of labour expenses. Considering the above we are of the view that it will be appropriate to restore this case to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudicating the aforesaid three ground of appeal of the assessee a fresh after verification and examination of the supporting document/information provided by the assessee. Appeal of the assessee is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudicating a fresh as stated above after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee.


B IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER &SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 2784/Ahd/2014 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Bijal Dhiman Vyas DCIT Prop. Of Aqua Master Clean Circle-10, Vs. 44, Parankunj Flats Balam Ahmedabad- 380009 Dairy Lane, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad- 380006 PAN/GIR No.: ABZPV7365D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri S. N. Divatia, AR Respondent by: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 09/08/2019 Date of Pronouncement 16/09/2019 ORDER PER AMARJIT SINGH - AM: appeal filed by Assessee for A.Y. 2010-11, arise from order of CIT(A)-XVI, Ahmedabad dated 25.08.2014, in proceedings under section 143(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961; in short Act . 2. fact in brief is that assessment u/s. 143(3) of Act was passed on 01.03.2013. AO has made various disallowance and total income was assessed at Rs. 76,11,303/- as against return of income of Rs. 22,00,500/- filed by assessee. ITA No. 2784/Ahd/2014 [Bijal Dhiman Vyas vs. DCIT] A.Y. 2010-11 2 3. Aggrieved assessee has filed before Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed appeal of assessee. 4. assessee has raised seven issues in ground appeal. During course of appellate proceeding before us Ld. Counsel has not pressed Ground No. 4 to 7 briefly disallowance of telephone expenses, vehicle expenses, depreciation of car and gift expenses. Therefore, ground of appeal filed on above four issues stand dismissed. remaining three ground of appeal to be adjudicated are on following issues: (i) Discrepancy in contract receipt (ii) Unexplained cash credit of Rs. 8,00,000/- (iii) Disallowance out of labour expenses of Rs. 33,19,460/-. During course of assessment AO noticed that assessee has shown Rs. 6,53,44,578/- as contract receipt, however, as per Form No. 26AS gross contract receipt was shown at Rs. 6,62,87,189/-. AO has stated that assessee has neither furnished any detail now any reconciliation therefore, difference of Rs. 9,42,611/- including receipt of interest from Bank of India amounting to Rs. 52,914/- was added to total income of assessee. Regarding addition of Rs. 8,00,000/- under head unexplained cash credit, AO noticed that assessee has claimed amount of Rs. 8,00,000/- as unexplained loan from Rathi Sir. AO has disallowed same as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of Act on ground that assessee has failed to furnish complete details and explanation in support of her claim. In respect of disallowance out of labour expenses of Rs. 33,19,460/- AO noticed that assessee has paid Rs. 4,24,41,725/- towards labour expense without deduction of tax and assessee has not submitted supporting voucher in respect of incurring of labour expenses. Therefore, AO has disallowed 10% of labour expenses to amount of Rs. 93,19,460/- and added to total income of assessee. ITA No. 2784/Ahd/2014 [Bijal Dhiman Vyas vs. DCIT] A.Y. 2010-11 3 5. Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed appeal of assessee. 6. During course of appellate proceeding before us Ld. Counsel has furnished Paper Book containing 158 pages consisting of information and document filed before AO and Ld. CIT(A) during course of assessment proceeding and appellate proceeding. Ld. Counsel has contended that AO has not considered document and information furnished during course of assessment proceeding and Ld. CIT(A) has sustained disallowance without any valid reason. 7. On other hand, Ld. DR has relied on order of lower authorities. 8. We have heard both sides and perused material on record. In respect of discrepancy in contract receipt notice by AO Ld. Counsel has referred Page No. 56 of Paper Book comprising letter dated 31.12.2012 filed before AO towards reconciliation of differences observed in contract receipt. It is contended that both authorities have not considered detail and document as referred above before adding and confirming disallowance. Regarding addition of unexplained cash credit of Rs. 8,00,000/- Ld. Counsel has referred documents placed at Page No. 136 to 141 of Paper Book comprising copies of confirmation, copies of Pan No. copies of return of income, copies of balance sheet and copies of bank statement etc. of lender available before AO and Ld. CIT(A) however same were not considered. Regarding third addition on disallowance of labour expenses of Rs. 33,19,460/- Ld. Counsel has referred Page No. 61 to 85 of Paper Book comprising detail and copies of document ledger account etc. in support of incurring of labour expenses. In light of above facts and circumstances assessee has furnished specific detail along with copies of documents as supporting evidences to reconcile discrepancy observed by AO in respect of contract receipt. It is also ITA No. 2784/Ahd/2014 [Bijal Dhiman Vyas vs. DCIT] A.Y. 2010-11 4 noticed that assessee has also furnished document of lender such as PAN card, return of income, balance confirmation, bank statement etc. to proof genuineness of unexplained loan of Rs. 8,00,000/-. assessee has also furnished various detail and information in respect of claim of labour expenses and was also brought to notice of AO that TDS provision was not applicable to labour payments. After considering aforesaid fact it is noticed that AO has not specifically considered above cited specific detail and information furnished by assessee during course of assessment proceeding. It is also noticed that Ld. CIT(A) has retreated reason of disallowance given by AO without considering specific detail and information provided by assessee during course of assessment and appellate proceeding. In view of above facts, we observe that Ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated case as prescribed in provision of Sec. 250(6) of Act which provide that while disposing appeal CIT(A) shall state points for determination decision thereon and reason for decision. Considering above we are of view that it will be appropriate to restore this case to file of CIT(A) for adjudicating aforesaid three ground of appeal of assessee fresh after verification and examination of supporting document/information provided by assessee. Therefore, appeal of assessee is restored to file of CIT(A) for adjudicating fresh as stated above after providing adequate opportunity to assessee. Accordingly, appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose 9. In result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 16/09/2019 Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR PRASAD) (AMARJIT SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 16/09/2019 TANMAY TRUE COPY ITA No. 2784/Ahd/2014 [Bijal Dhiman Vyas vs. DCIT] A.Y. 2010-11 5 Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Revenue 2. Assessee 3. (Concerned CIT 4. (CIT (A) 5. ) 'DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order. Date o f d ic tat io n on 0 9 .0 8 .2 0 1 9 2 .Da te o n wh i c h t h e t yp ed d r ft i s p lac ed b e fo r e t he Dic ta ti n g Me mb er 1 9 .0 8 .2 0 1 9 3 .Da te o n wh i c h t h e ap p r o ved d r f t co me s to t he Sr . P . S./P . S. 1 6 .0 9 .2 0 1 9 4 .Da te o n wh i c h t h e fa ir o r d er i s p lac ed b e fo r e t he D ict at i n g M e mb er fo r P r o no u nce me nt 1 6 .0 9 .2 0 1 9 5 .Da te o n wh i c h t h e fa ir o r d er co me s b ac k to t he Sr . P . S./P . S 1 6 .0 9 . 2 0 1 9 6 .Da te o n wh i c h t h e fi le go es to t he B e n c h Cl er k 1 6 .0 9 .2 0 1 9 7 .Da te o n wh i c h t h e fi le go es to t he Head C ler k . 8 .T he d te o n wh i c h t h e f il e go e s to t he As st t. R eg i str r fo r si g n at ur e o n t he o r d er 9 .Da te o f De sp tc h o f t h e Or d e r Bijal Dhiman Vyas v. DCIT, Circle-10, Ahmedabad
Report Error