Vijaykumar Rooplalji Jaiswal Vs ACIT (ITAT Nagpur)
The assessee appealed an order of the CIT(A)/NFAC relating to the assessment for the A.Y. 2014–15 under sections 143(3) and 250 of the Income-tax Act. The primary dispute concerns the addition of ₹16,22,425 on account of promotional expenses incurred under a dealer scheme in the liquor business. Additional grounds pertain to disallowance of bottle cap commission and levy of interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C.
At the hearing, the assessee sought condonation of delay in filing the appeal, supported by an affidavit stating that the CIT(A) had not sent communications to the correct email address mentioned in Form 35. The Department confirmed that emails were sent to two different IDs, which the assessee stated did not belong to him. As the Department raised no objection, the delay was condoned and the appeal admitted.
The assessee, a senior citizen engaged in the liquor business, filed the return of income on 30 April 2014 declaring ₹30,75,027. The case was selected for complete scrutiny and notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued. The Assessing Officer made two additions. The first related to bottle cap commission, where many vouchers were self-made, leading to an estimated disallowance of 20% amounting to ₹1,67,485. The second and major issue involved promotional expenses of ₹16,22,425 booked under a dealer scheme. The assessee responded to the show cause notice with detailed submissions, but the Assessing Officer held that the email relied upon by the assessee was dated 15 September 2014 for the financial year 2014–15, whereas the Profit and Loss account reflected the expenses on 31 March 2014. The Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee must have received reimbursement from the company and disallowed the amount, assessing the income at ₹48,64,940.
