TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (11) TMI 511
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce of Rs. 3,77,000/- and Rs. 50,000/- sustained by the ld. CIT(Appeals) out of the total disallowance of Rs. 27,46,154/- and Rs. 10,21,101/- made by the Assessing Officer out of the growing charges and transportation charges respectively. 2. The assessee in the present case is an individual who is engaged in the business of hatchery. The return of income for the year consideration was filed by him on 30.09.2008 declaring a loss. In the said return, deduction of Rs. 37,77,871/- was claimed by the assessee on account of expenses incurred on growing charges (farmer). During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was called upon by the A.O. to furnish the relevant details of growing charges such as name and address of the farmer, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated 31.12.2010. 3. Against the order passed by the A.O. under section 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) challenging the disallowance made by the A.O. on account of growing charges and other transportation charges and after considering the submissions made by the assessee as well as the material available on record, the Ld. CIT(A) restricted the disallowance made by the A.O. on account of growing charges and other transportation expenses to Rs. 3,77,000/- and Rs. 50,000/- respectively for the following reasons given in para no 4 of his impugned order: "I have considered the finding of the A.O. in his order dated 31.12.2010 and the written submission ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rd. Therefore, in my opinion the adhoc disallowances by the A.O. on estimate basis is very high. But there is no denying the fact that in the absence of supporting details and documents assessee's claim could also not be accepted completely. Hence, disallowance under this head is restricted to 10% of the total claim made by the assessee under the head growing charges i.e. Rs. 3,77,000/-. Thus, assessee's appeal on ground no 1(a) is partly allowed. Assessee's appeal on ground no 1(b) is against the disallowance of Rs. 1021101/- under the head other transportation charges. The A.O. in his assessment order has disallowed this amount on the ground that the assessee is claiming expenditure on AIR Transportation, Rly. Freight, Car Hire Charges....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unal vide its order dated June 20, 2018 and the issues involved therein, which are common to the issues raised in the present Cross Objection filed by the assessee, were decided by the Tribunal vide paragraph no. 5 of its order as under:- "5. At the time of hearing before the Tribunal, none has appeared on behalf of the assessee. Even on the earlier occasions when this appeal was fixed for hearing, nobody had appeared on behalf of the assessee. This appeal of the revenue is therefore being disposed of ex-parte qua the respondent assessee after hearing the arguments of the learned DR and perusing the relevant material available on record. It is observed that the relief allowed by the Ld. CIT(A) to the assessee restricting the disallowance....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d of violation of Rule 46A which is not there. Moreover, the disallowance made by the A.O. on account of growing charges and other transport charges was highly excessive and unreasonable as found by the Ld. CIT(A) and there is nothing brought on record by the learned DR to rebut or controvert the findings recorded by the Ld. CIT(A) in this regard. The learned DR has also not been able to point out as to how the disallowance sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) out of growing charges and other transport charges is not fair and reasonable. In my opinion, the relevant facts and figures as discussed by the Ld. CIT(A) in his impugned order show that the disallowance so sustained by him is quite fair and reasonable and there is no justifiable reason to in....