Akik Tiles Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad V. The ACIT.,Cent.Circle-2(2), Ahmedabad

CO 17/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9787 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 25-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 11-09-2014
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 29-01-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Business income; Corroborative evidences; Assessment record
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 68; 6; 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, AHMEDABAD (BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI , A.M. & SHRI KUL BHARAT, J.M ) I. T. A. NO. 577 / AHD/ 20 1 0 & C.O NO. 74/AHD/2012 (A SSESSMENT YEAR: 2005 - 06) ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), AHMEDABAD M/S. AKIK TILES PVT. LTD. 3, HARIOM COMPLEX, NR. OLD MARKET YARD HIMATNAGAR V/S M/S. AKIK TILES PVT. LTD. 3, HAR IOM COMPLEX, NR. OLD MARKET YARD HIMATNAGAR ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) IT(SS)A NO. 585/AHD/2010 & C.O. NO. 17AHD/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004 - 05) ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), AHMEDABAD M/S. AKIK TIL ES PVT. LTD. 3, HARIOM COMPLEX, NR. OLD MARKET YARD HIMATNAGAR V/S M/S. AKIK TILES PVT. LTD. 3, HARIOM COMPLEX, NR. OLD MARKET YARD HIMATNAGAR ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN: AACCA3201G APPELLAN T BY : SHRI SUBHASH BAINS, CIT/DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.N. SOPARKAR WITH SHRI P.M MEHTA, A.R. ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 11 - 09 - 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25 - 09 - 2014 ITA NO 577/A/10 & IT(SS)A 585/A/10 & C.O NOS. 17 /A/2013 & 74/A/2012 . A.Y S . 2004 - 05 2 PER SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI,A.M. 1. THESE APPEAL S OF REVENUE ARE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT DATED 11.05.2010 AND 27.11.2009 FOR A.Y. 04 - 05 AND A.Y. 05 - 06 RESPECTIVELY AND ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED C.O S. 2. WE FIRST TAKE UP REVENUE S APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2005 - 06. 3. THE FACTS AS CULLED OUT FROM THE MATERIAL ON RECORD ARE AS UNDER. 4. ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY STATED TO BE ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFAC TUR ING OF CERAMIC GLA ZED TILES. ASSESSE E FILED ITS RE T URN OF INCOME FOR A .Y. 05 - 06 ON 20.6 - 2006 AND DECLARED THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS. NIL. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND THERE AFTER THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED U/S 143(3) VIDE O RDER DATED 28.12.2006 AND TOTAL INCOME WAS DETERMINED AT RS. 66,15,070/ - . AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF A.O, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE CIT(A). CIT(A) VIDE O RDER DATED 27.11. 2009 GRANTED PARTIAL RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A), REVENUE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US, AND ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED A C.O. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE READS AS UNDER : - 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS 59,74,500/ - MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME U/S. 68 OF THE I.T. ACT. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 5,14,538/ - MADE ON ACCOU NT OF INITIAL INVESTMENT. GROUND NO. 1 IS WITH RESPECT TO DELETION OF ADDITION MADE U/S. 68. 5. ON VERIFICATION OF THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE , A.O NOTICED THAT AN AMOUNT OF RS. 2,96,26,789/ - WAS SHOWN TO HAVE RECEIVED BY THE ASSES SEE FROM VARIOUS PERSONS OF VIMAL G ROUP AND OTHERS. ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FURNISH THE COMPLETE DETAILS OF THE DEPOSITORS, PROVE THEIR IDENTITY AND THE GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTIONS WITH SUPPORTING EVIDENCES. IN RESPONSE TO THE QUERY , A.O IN THE ASSESSMENT O RDER NOTED THAT ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THE COPY OF CONFIRMATION LEDGER ACCOUNT OF THE PARTIES ALONG WITH THE ADDRESSES AND PAN NUMBERS WHEREVER ITA NO 577/A/10 & IT(SS)A 585/A/10 & C.O NOS. 17 /A/2013 & 74/A/2012 . A.Y S . 2004 - 05 3 APPLICABLE. THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT FOUND ACCEPTABLE TO THE A.O . A.O NOTICED THAT OUT OF THE TOTAL LO ANS, AGGREGATE LOAN OF RS. 38,70,280/ - WERE ITSELF TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE IN EARLIER YEAR AND IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION . OUT OF THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF UNSECURED OF LOAN OF RS. 2,57,66,509/ - , A.O WAS OF THE VIEW THAT OUT OF THE SUPPOR TING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES FOR 45 PARTIES FILED BY ASSESSEE, IN CASE OF 8 PARTIES LISTED ON PAGE 10 AND 11 OF THE ORDER, THE AGGREGATE DEPOSITS OF WHICH WERE RS. 84,14,5 00/ - WERE NOT GENUINE. A.O AFTER GIVING CREDIT OF RS. 24,40,000/ - WHICH WAS DISCLOSED B Y ASSESSEE AS UNEXPLAINED, CONSIDERED THE BALANCE AMOUNT O F RS. 59,74,500/ - AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT AND ADDED TO THE INCOME. AGGRIE VED BY THE ORDER OF A.O, ASSESSEE CARRIED TH E MATTER BEFOR E CIT(A). CIT(A ) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSES SEE DELETED SUBSTANTIAL A DDITION BY HOLDING AS UNDER: - 2. THE FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL IS GENERAL IN NATURE. THE SECOND GROUND IS APPEAL IS AGAINST THE ADDITION OF RS. 59,74,500/ - AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME U/S. 68 OF THE I.T. ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITION OF RS. 59,74,500/ - FOR FOLLOWING FIVE PARTIES U/S. 68 OF THE ACT FOR THE REASONS STATED IN PER PARA 3, PAGE 8 TO 11 OF THE ASSESSMEN T ORDER. (1) GANPA TH D PATEL (HUF) RS. 59,500/ - (2) GIRISH J. PATEL RS. 41,65,000/ - (3) MANOJBHAI R. HARIYA RS. 15,00,000/ - (4) RAMJIBHAI R. PATEL RS. 50,000/ - (5) VITHALBHAI H PATEL RS. 59,74,500/ - 3 THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED THAT OUT OF ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED DEPOSITS OF RS. 59,74,500/ - , ONLY RS. 15,00,000/ - REPRESENTS AMOUNT RECEIVED IN THIS YEAR. BALANC E AMOUNT OF RS. 44,74,500/ - PERTAINS TO EARLIER YEAR AND CANNOT BE TAXED IN CURRENT YEAR U/S 68 OF THE ACT. WITH REGARD TO OBSERVATION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT APPELLANT HAS 'FAILED TO ESTABLISH THE IDENTITY OF DEPOSITOR, APPELLANT STATES THAT IT HAS SUBMITTED THE COPY OF THE SOURCE CONFIRMATIONS OF THE DEPOSITORS, COPY OF PAN OF DEPOSITORS ALONG WITH COPIES OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RETURN, WHICH PROVE THAT IDENTITY OF DEPOSITORS ARE FULLY PROVED AND ESTABLISHED. WITH REGARD TO OBSERVATION OF ASSESSING OF FICER REGARDING CREDITWORTHINESS OF DEPOSITORS, THE APPELLANT STATES THAT IT HAS ALREADY EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF THE DEPOSITS. FURTHER, THE DEPARTMENT HAS NOT BROUGHT OUT ANY ADVERSE MATERIAL AGAINST THEIR CREDITWORTHINESS. THE A.O. HAS HELD THEM TO BE NON - CREDITWORTHINESS ONLY ON THE BASIS OF SURMISES OR GUESSWORK. THE APPELLANT FURTHER STATES THAT IT IS ALSO TRITE LAW THAT APPELLANT CANNOT BE PRESUMED TO HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF SOURCE OF THE DEPOSITOR OR FROM WHERE HE BROUGHT THE MONEY. IN THIS REGARD, REFERENC E IS INVITED TO THE DECISION OF HON'BLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD, IN CASE OF ROHINI BUILDERS REPORTED IN 76 TTJ.532 WHICH WAS CONFIRMED BY THE GUJARAT HIGH COURT REPORTED AT 256 ITR 360. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DECISIONS IT MAY BE APPRECIATED THAT THE APPELLANT COULD NOT BE EXPECTED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF THE DEPOSITS GIVEN BY THE DEPOSITOR. THE DEPOSITS MADE ARE THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL AND IS SUPPORTED BY THE CONFIRMATIONS DULY EXECUTED BY THE DEPOSITORS WHO ARE AN INCOME - TAX ASSESSEES AND W HO HAVE GIVEN THE DEPOSITS BY WAY OF CHEQUE FROM THEIR BANK ACCOUNT. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O. DESERVES TO BE DELETED. 4 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS AND THE SUBMISSIONS. I AGREE WITH THE APPELLANT'S VIEW. I FIND THAT ONLY RS.15,00 ,000/ - REPRESENTS AMOUNT RECEIVED IN THIS YEAR. BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS. 44,74,500/ - PERTAINS TO EARLIER YEAR AND CANNOT BE TAXED IN CURRENT YEAR U/S. 68 OF THE ACT. FURTHER, IN RESPECT OF LOAN OF RS. 15,00,000/ - RECEIVED FROM SHRI MANOJBHAI R.HARIA, THE APPE LLANT HAS GIVEN CONFIRMATION, COPY OF ACCOUNT, PAN AND COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT WHICH IS AVAILABLE IN THE ASSESSMENT RECORD ALTHOUGH THE A.O. HAS OBSERVED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT NO DETAILS WERE GIVEN AND THE A.O. IN HIS REPORT DATED 24711/2009 HAS STATED ITA NO 577/A/10 & IT(SS)A 585/A/10 & C.O NOS. 17 /A/2013 & 74/A/2012 . A.Y S . 2004 - 05 4 THAT THE APPELLANT HAS NOT FILED SAID DETAILS THROUGH FORWARDING LETTER OR THROUGH ORDER SHEET ENTRY. WHEN THE APPELLANT HAS GIVEN DETAILS AND CONFIRMATION WHICH IS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND THE PARTY IS ASSESSED TO TAX, THE ADDITION FOR CASH CREDIT CANNOT BE MADE AS PER DECISION OF HON'BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ROHINI BUILDERS WHERE IT IS HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT TO PROVE THE SOURCE OF THE SOURCE. IN VIEW OF THIS, THE ADDITION IS DELETED AND THE APPELLANT'S GROUND IS ALLOWED. 6. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) , REVENUE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 7. BEFORE US, LD D.R. TOOK US THROUGH THE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE A.O IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND SUPPORTED HIS ORDER. THE LD A.R. ON THE OTHER HAND SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED ALL THE NECESSARY EVIDENCES IN THE FORM OF CONFIRMATION AND OTHER RELEVANT EVIDENCES. HE FURTHER REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE A.O AND CIT(A). AND THUS SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF CIT(A) . HE ALSO PLACED RELIANCE ON THE DECISION OF HON BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. PRAGATI CO - OP. BANK LTD (2005) 278 ITR 170 (GUJ) AND MURLIDHAR LAHORIMAL VS. CIT (2006) 280 ITR 512 (GUJ ) . 8. WE HAVE HEAR D THE RIVAL SUBMI SSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ISSUE IN THE PRESENT GROUND IS WITH RESPECT TO A DDITION U/S 68. WE FIND THAT CIT(A) WHILE GIVING RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE HAS NOTED THAT OUT OF THE TOTAL UNEXPLAINED DEPOSITS OF RS. 59.74 LACS , ONLY THE DEPOSIT RECEIVED FROM MANOJBHAI HARIYA REPRESENTS AMOUNT RECEIVED IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AND THE BALANCE AM O UNT OF RS. 44,74,500/ - RECEIVED FROM 4 OTHER PERSONS WERE RECEIVED IN EARLIER YEARS. CIT(A) WITH RESPECT OF LOAN OF RS. 15 LACS RECE IVED FROM SHRI MANOJBHAI HARIYA HAS FURTHER GIVEN A FINDING THAT ASSESSEE HAD GIVEN CONFIRMATION, COPY OF AC COUNT, PAN NUMBER AND THE COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT . WITH RESPECT TO THE AMOUNT RECEIVED IN EARLIER YEARS , CIT(A) HAS NOTED THAT THE AMOUNT CANNOT BE TAXED IN CURRENT YEAR U/S 68 OF THE ACT. BEFORE US REVENUE HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD TO CONTROVER T THE FI N DINGS OF CIT(A) WE THEREFORE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND THUS THIS GROUND OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED. GROUND NO. 2 IS WITH RESPECT TO DELETION OF RS. 5,14,538/ - MADE ON ACCOUNT OF INITIAL INVESTMENT. ITA NO 577/A/10 & IT(SS)A 585/A/10 & C.O NOS. 17 /A/2013 & 74/A/2012 . A.Y S . 2004 - 05 5 9. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, A.O NOTICED THAT WHILE FINALIZING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999 - 2000 U/S 153A , IT WAS ESTIMATED THAT AT LEAST 40.11% OF TOTAL SALES WAS REQUIRED AS INITIAL INVESTMENT TO PRODUCE FINISHED GOODS OR MAKING SALES OF AN AMOUNT OF RS. 1,2 1,71,028/ - . A.O THEREAFTER WORKED OUT THE ADDITIONAL INVESTMENT REQUIRED TO MAKE THE UNDISCLOSED SALES OF RS. 3.03 CRORE IN THE YEAR AT RS. 5,14,538/ - AND ADDED IT TO TOTAL INCOME AS INITIAL INVESTMENT. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF A.O, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE CIT(A). CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE AS SESSEE DELETED THE ADDITION BY HOLDING AS UNDER: - 8. THE FOURTH GROUND OF APPEAL IS AGAINST ADDITION FOR INITIAL INVESTMENT OF RS.5,14,538/ - FOR ALLEGED UNACCOUNTED SALES. THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER HAS HELD THAT FOR MAKING UNACCOUNTED SALES THE APPELLANT REQUIRES INITIAL INVESTMENT AND HAS COMPUTED SUCH INVESTMENT BY APPLYING RATIO OF CLOSING STOCK AND DEBTOR TO TURNOVER BEING 40.11%. THE SAID RATIO HAS BEEN WORKED OUT ON THE BASIS OF STOCK , DEBTORS AND TURNOVER SHOWN IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT. THE ADDITION OF RS.5,14,538/ - HAS BEEN MADE BY APPLYING RATIO OF 40.11% OF ALLEGED UNACCOUNTED SALES. 9. THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED THAT NO INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS WERE FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SE ARCH WHICH ESTABLISHES .THAT THERE IS UNACCOUNTED TURNOVER IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT, REQUIRED FOR INITIAL INVESTMENT. HENCE, NO SUCH ADDITION CAN BE MADE IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT WITHOUT BRINGING ANY CORROBORATIVE ADDITION OR INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE S. THE ASSESSMENT ORDER MAKES AN ADDITION OF RS. 5,14,538/ - FOR THE ALLEGED EXISTENCE OF INVESTMENT FOR EFFECTING THE SALES OUTSIDE BOOKS. OBVIOUSLY, IT IS WHOLLY ON CONJECTURES AND SURMISES. EVEN THE ARGUMENTS TAKEN HEREIN ARE FALLACIOUS. FIRSTLY THERE IS NO BASIS FOR TAKING IN TO ACCOUNT THE FIGURES OF CLOSING STOCK AND DEBTORS ONLY MORE PARTICULARLY BECAUSE THE FIGURE OF DEBTORS CANNOT BE ADOPTED WITHOUT ADJUSTMENT OF THE FIGURE OF CREDITORS. YET ANOTHER ASPECT IS THAT THE SALES ARE EFFECTED OVER A PERIOD OF 12 MONTHS AND ROLLING OVER TAKES PLACE CONTINUOUSLY MEANING THEREBY THAT EVEN UNDISCLOSED SALES COMPUTED ABOUT RS. 3 CRORES FOR THE PERIOD OF 4 MONTHS WOULD BE INVOLVING MONTHLY SALES OF ABOUT RS.75 LACS AND IN THE CONTEXT OF FIGURES INVOLVED IN THIS C ASE THERE WOULD NOT BE ANY SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT NEEDED FOR THE SAME. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE, WHILE COMPUTING RATIO FOR WORKING CAPITAL, AS DEBTORS HAS BEEN TAKEN BY AO, VALUE OF CREDITOR IS REQUIRED TO BE REDUCED AND TO THAT EXTENT RATIO WILL CHANGE. MOREOVER, THE WORKING CAPITAL RATIO IS TAKEN OF A.Y 1999 - 00 FOR THE A.Y. 2005 - 06 WHICH COMES TO 20.04%.THUS, RATIO ALMOST BECOMES HALF OF WHAT IS TAKEN. THE CONSEQUENTIAL EFFECT ON ESTIMATION OF WORKING CAPITAL REQUIREMENT WOULD BE NIL. 10. I HAVE CONSIDE RED THE FACTS AND THE SUBMISSIONS. I AGREE WITH THE APPELLANT'S VIEW. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS APPLIED RATIO OF 40.11% OF UNACCOUNTED SALES REQUIRED FOR INITIAL INVESTMENT WHICH IS BASED ON THE INITIAL YEAR 1999 - 2000 AND THAT TOO AFTER CONSIDERING CLOSING STOCK AND DEBTORS WITHOUT CONSIDERING CREDITORS. THE RATIO SHOULD BE APPLIED CONSIDERING THE FIGURES OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004 - 05 & 2005 - 06 AND THAT TOO AFTER CONSIDERING THE CREDITORS FOR THE GOODS WHEN THE DEBTORS ARE TO BE CONSIDERED. WHITE DOING SO, THE ESTIMATION FOR WORKING CAPITAL REQUIREMENT FOR UNACCOUNTED SALES WILL BE NIL. HENCE, THE ADDITION IS DELETED. 10. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A), REVENUE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 11. BEFORE US, LD D.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF A.O AND FURTHER SUBMIT TED THAT THE ASSESSEE WHEN IN THE STATEMENT OF FACTS FILED BEFORE CIT(A) HAD ITSELF ADMITTED ITA NO 577/A/10 & IT(SS)A 585/A/10 & C.O NOS. 17 /A/2013 & 74/A/2012 . A.Y S . 2004 - 05 6 THAT FOR COMPUTING THE RATIO OF WORKING CAPITAL , THE VALUE OF CREDITORS IS ALSO REQUIRED TO BE TAKEN M EANING THEREBY THAT WHEN ASSESSEE ITSELF HAD ADMITTED THE INI TIAL INVESTMENT THEN CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION. LD A.R. ON THE OTHER HAND REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE A.O AND CIT(A) AND FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT NO INCRIMINATING DOCUMENT WERE FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH WHICH ESTABL ISHES THAT THERE WAS UNACCOUNTED TURNOVER AND THEREFORE REQUIREMENT OF INITIAL CAPITAL. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT A.O HAD CONSIDERED THE WORKING CAPITAL RATIO OF A.Y. 99 - 2000 FOR WORKING OUT THE ADDITION. LD. A .R. ALSO SUBMITTED THAT IN THE STATEMENT OF FA CT BEFORE CIT(A), THE SUBMISSIONS OF ASSESSEE WAS WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ITS MAIN CONTENTION THAT NO ADDITION WAS REQUIRED. HE THEREFORE SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITION MADE IS WITHOUT ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD AND THE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF CIT(A). 12. WE HAVE HEAR D THE R IVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE F IND THAT CIT(A) WHILE DELETING THE ADDITION HAS GIVEN A FINDING THAT A.O HAD APPLIED THE RATIO OF UNACCOUNTED SALES REQUIRED FOR IN I TIAL INVESTMENT BASED ON THE INITIAL YEAR 1999 - 2000 AND FURT HER THE CALCULATION WAS NOT PROPER AS THE CREDITOR FOR GOODS WERE NOT CONSIDERED. BEFORE US REVENUE HAS NOT PLACED ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD TO CONTROVERT THE FINDINGS OF CIT(A). W E THEREFORE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND THUS THIS GROUND OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 13. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED. WE NOW TAKE UP ASSESSEE S C.O IN C.O NO. 74/A HD /2012 ( FOR A.Y 05 - 06) 14. THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE CO READS AS UNDER: - 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING ESTIMATED ADDITION OF RS. 1,26,031 MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY APPLYING A GP RATE OF 25% ON THE UNACCOUNTED SALES, WHEREAS ADEQUATE PROFIT HAD ALREADY BEEN DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME, ON THE AFORESAID UNACCOUNTED SALES. 15. BEFORE US, THE LD A .R. DID NOT PRESS THE C.O IN VIEW OF SMALLNESS OF A MOUNT AND THEREFORE THE GROUND IS DISMISSED . ITA NO 577/A/10 & IT(SS)A 585/A/10 & C.O NOS. 17 /A/2013 & 74/A/2012 . A.Y S . 2004 - 05 7 16. IN THE RESULT, THE C.O OF ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. WE NOW TAKE UP REVENUE S APPEAL IN IT(SS) A NO . 585/AHD/ 2010 FOR A.Y. 04 - 05 . 17. THE GROUNDS RAISED READS AS UNDER: - 1. THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.22,40,000 / - MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED/BOGUS DEPOSIT. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCU MSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE CIT(A)OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE A.O. 18. BEFORE US, BOTH THE PARTIES SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT GROUND IS IDENTICAL TO GROUND NO. 1 OF ITA NO. 577 /AHD/2010 FOR A.Y. 05 - 06 AND THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THEM WHIL E ARGUING GROUND NO. 1 FOR A.Y. 05 - 06 WOULD BE EQUALLY APPLICABLE TO THE PRESENT GROUND. 19. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. SINCE IT IS ADMITTED BY BOTH THE PARTIES THAT THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE PRESENT GROUND ARE IDENTICAL TO THAT GROUND NO. 1 FOR A.Y. 05 - 06. WE THEREFORE FOR SIMILAR REASONS GIVEN HEREINABOVE WHILE DISPOSING THE GROUND NO. 1 OF R EVENUE S APPEAL FOR A.Y. 05 - 06 AND FOR S IMILAR REASONS HEREINABOVE ALSO DISMISS THIS GROUND. 20. THUS THE APPEAL OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED WE NOW TAKE UP ASSESSEE S C.O. IN C.O. NO. 17/AHD/2013. (FOR A.Y. 2004 - 05) 21. THE GROUNDS RAISED READS AS UNDER. 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.2,00,000 MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S.68 OF THE IT. ACT IN RESPECT OF CREDIT IN THE NAME OF PRAVINBHAI P. PATEL. 22. BEFORE US, THE LD A .R. DID NOT PRESS THE C.O IN VIEW OF SMALLNESS O F AMOUNT AND THEREFORE WE DISMISS THE C.O AS NOT PRESSED. 23. IN THE RESULT, THE C.O IS DISMISSED. ITA NO 577/A/10 & IT(SS)A 585/A/10 & C.O NOS. 17 /A/2013 & 74/A/2012 . A.Y S . 2004 - 05 8 24. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF REVENUE AND C.O S. OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 25 - 0 9 - 201 4 . SD/ - SD/ - (KUL BHARAT ) (ANIL CHATURVEDI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD. TRUE COPY RAJESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABA D. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT,AHMEDABAD