TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (10) TMI 944
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has been initiated against the petitioner. (ii) To issue a further appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing order no.ITBA/AST/S/156/2019-20/1023551192 (1) dated 31.12.2019 passed by the Respondent Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(5) Madhubani whereby and where under a demand of Rs. 10,52,29,894/- has been raised against the petitioner under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act 1961. (iii) To issue a further appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing notice no. ITBA/PNL/S/271AAC (1) 2019-20/1023555223 (1) dated 31.12.2019 issued by the Respondent Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(5) Madhubani under section 274 read with 271 AAC (1) of the Income Tax Act 1961, where by and where under a penalty proceeding has been initiated against the petitioner for income determined to be chargeable. (iv) To issue a further appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing notice no.ITBA/PNL/S/270A/2019-20/102355 9626(1) dated 01.01.2020 issued by the Respondent Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(5) Madhubani under section 274 read with 270A of the Income Tax Act 1961, where by and where under a ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n nature. Since disputed questions of fact are raised before us, we refrain from adjudicating the same, reserving liberty to the petitioner to prefer a statutory appeal which is an equally efficacious remedy. As such, present petition stands disposed of. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that limitation may not come in the way of adjudication of the appeal. Shri Rishi Raj Sinha, learned counsel for the Income Tax Department, states that if an appeal is preferred within a period of four weeks from today, the issue of limitation shall neither be raised nor allowed to come in the way of adjudication of the appeal on merits, more so keeping in view current Pandemic Covid-19. Statement is accepted and taken on record. Shri Rishi Raj Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department, states that as on date no coercive action stands taken against the petitioner in terms of the demand raised pursuant to the passing of the impugned order and that position would be allowed to be maintained if the petitioner were to file an appeal within a period of four weeks from today. Statement accepted and taken on record. No other submission i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ank Madhubani 2515998700001399 3 Bank of Maharashtra Madhubani 60153831794 4 United Bank of India Madhubani 1634050000602 Total Rs 15765000/- Rs 68775000/- Rs 2475000/- 98465500/- 28 The assessee's representative Sri Digamber Kumar Thakur appeared on 26.12.2019 with submissions. VAT retum, bank accounts. it was also claimed that he is a dealer of fertilizer and seeds. He sells under the license no. DFK20041600540R issued by the district administration. A written submission also explains that government had allowed some essential commodities like petro, diesel, fertilizer, mobile recharge vouchers. There was no bar on these dealers for accepting SBNs. He himself admitted that there were total deposits by him during the demonetisations period was Rs 107498000/- including new and old currencies too. Through notice he was asked to produce any documentary evidence issued by the RBI, Government which permitted him to accept the SBNs in demonetisation period. He failed to produce any document. 1. As required by notice u/s 142(1) of the Income Tax Act 61 no cash book was produced. The check list sent for comparison for last year cash de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ebited Rs. 121501/- under this head. The expenses claimed under head are not fully verifiable as it has been mostly incurred in cash ard met by internal vouchers. Therefore, a sum of Rs. 6075/- being 5% of the expenses is disallowed and added back to the total income of assessee under the head profit and gains of business or profession. 6. Travelling expenses: The assessee has debited Rs. 33560- under this head. The expenses claimed under head are not fully verifiable as it has been mostly incurred in cash and met by internal vouchers. Document 3 ARTHIK BOKON SANJEET KUVAR AY 2017.16 1520-3-20 1029551170(1) On being asked for evidence about such travel to meet business purpose, no such evidence wa6781-being the absence of evidence travel for personal purpose may not be denied. Therefore, a sum of Rs. 167817-being 5 % of the expenses is disallowed and added back to the total income of assessee under the head profil and gains of business or profession. 7. Mise Expenses: The assessee has debited Rs 253710/- under the head. The expenses claimed under head are not fully verifiable as it has been mostly incurred in ca....