2012 (7) TMI 409 - AT - Income Tax

Appellate tribunal confirms CIT(A)'s decision on credit card expenses, dismisses revenue's appeal, accepts additional evidence. Penalty proceedings initiated.

Income-tax Officer, Versus Shri Rajeev Kumar Chabbra,

Income-tax Officer, Versus Shri Rajeev Kumar Chabbra, - TMI Issues:1. Addition of unexplained expenditure by Assessing Officer.2. Admissibility of additional evidence before the appellate authority.3. Assessment of income based on credit card expenses.4. Dispute regarding cash payment not explained by the assessee.Issue 1: Addition of unexplained expenditure by Assessing OfficerThe Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs.24,85,929 to the total income of the assessee due to unverified expenses incurred through credit cards. The AO proceeded ex parte under sec. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as the assessee did not comply with the notices and failed to produce books of account and supporting vouchers. The AO justified the addition as funds received from undisclosed sources. Penalty proceedings were also initiated separately.Issue 2: Admissibility of additional evidence before the appellate authorityBefore the Learned CIT(Appeals), the assessee produced additional evidence regarding credit card expenses, which was permitted by the CIT(A). The AO objected to the admission of additional evidence, citing sufficient opportunity during the assessment stage. However, the AO verified the credit card payments with the bank statement and acknowledged the veracity of the additional evidence. The CIT(A) allowed the additional evidence submission as it was crucial and went to the root of the appeal.Issue 3: Assessment of income based on credit card expensesThe CIT(A) analyzed the additional evidence submitted by the assessee, detailing credit card payments amounting to Rs.36,71,768, with a significant portion spent on diesel for trucks. The CIT(A) accepted the verified credit card statements and bank statements, concluding that only a portion of the expenses pertained to personal use and should be added back to the income. The CIT(A) sustained an addition of Rs.75,437 while deleting the balance amount of Rs.24,10,492 based on the additional evidences presented.Issue 4: Dispute regarding cash payment not explained by the assesseeThe revenue raised concerns about a cash payment of Rs.13,57,710 not explained by the assessee. However, no such issue was evident in either the assessment order or the CIT(A)'s order. The appellate tribunal found no correlation between the grounds raised by the revenue and the actual dispute raised in the assessment order. Considering the detailed analysis and findings of the CIT(A), the tribunal dismissed the appeal, as it lacked merit based on the evidence presented and the assessment proceedings.In conclusion, the appellate tribunal upheld the decision of the CIT(A) regarding the assessment of income based on credit card expenses, emphasizing the importance of additional evidence and proper verification. The tribunal dismissed the appeal by the revenue, citing lack of merit and coherence in the grounds raised.