M/s Midas Naturals Pvt. Ltd., Ludhiana V. DCIT, CC-1, Ludhiana

ITA 1096/CHANDI/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5858 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-01-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 07-08-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHOK KHANNA CIT
• Section: 143(2); 69A

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BE NCH B, CHANDIGARH (VIRTUAL COURT) .., ! '# .. , $ %& BEFORE: SHRI. N.K.SAINI, VP & SHRI , R.L. NEGI, JM ITA NO. 1096/CHD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2017-18 M/S MIDAS NATURALS PVT. LTD. 17-18-19, APEX NAGAR, BAREWAL ROAD NEAR WESTEND MALL, LUDHIANA THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA PAN NO: AAJCM3756D APPELLANT RESPONDENT !' ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ASHWANI KUMAR, CA #!' REVENUE BY : SHRI ASHOK KHANNA, ADDL. CIT $ %! & DATE OF HEARING : 13/01/2021 '()*! & DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21/01/2021 %'/ ORDER PER N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DT. 28/06/2019 OF LD. CIT(A)-5, LUDHIANA. 2. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED IN THIS APPEAL READS AS U NDER: THAT ORDER PASSED U/S 250(6) OF THE INCOME TAX AC T, 1961 BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-5, LUDHIANA IS AGAINST LAW AND FACTS ON THE FILE IN AS MUCH AS HE WAS NOT JUSTIFIED TO ARBI TRARILY UPHOLD AN ADDITION OF RS. 1,07,282/- ON ACCOUNT OF CASH FOUND SHORT BY INVOKI NG THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 69A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AND ALSO UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE SAME BE CHARGED TO TAX U/ S 115BBE. 3. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE SEARCH A ND SEIZURE OPERATION WAS CONDUCTED ON 31/08/2016 IN THE CASE OF M/S AP GROUP OF CASES AND THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS AN OFFSHOOT OF M/S AP REFINERY PVT. LTD. JAGRAON. THE A.O. ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO FILE ITS RETURN OF INCOME BY ISSUING THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REF ERRED TO AS ACT). IN RESPONSE THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED THE RETURN OF INCOME ON 28/0 9/2017 DECLARING LOSS OF RS. 14,99,59,378/-. THE A.O. OBSERVED THAT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH PHYSICAL INVENTORY OF THE CASH WAS PREPARED WHICH REVEALED T HAT THE CASH IN HAND WAS AT RS. 13,12,000/- WHERE AS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT IT WAS AT RS. 14,19,282/-, THERE WAS A DIFFERENCE OF RS. 1,07,282/-. THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE AS REGARDS TO THE AFORESAID DIFFERENCE OF CASH WAS THAT THE CERTA IN EXPENSES WERE INCURRED BUT NOT ENTERED INTO THE CASH BOOK. THE A.O. HOWEVE R MADE THE ADDITION BY OBSERVING THAT NO SUCH DETAILS HAD BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD FOR VERIFICATION BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER TO THE LD. CIT(A) WHO SUSTAINED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O. 5. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL. 6. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE VERY OUTSET STATED THAT AN IDENTICAL ISSUE HAVING SIMILAR FACTS HAS BEEN ADJUDICATED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 1279/CHD/2019 FOR THE A.Y. 2017-18 IN THE CASE OF M/S A.P. REFINERY PVT. LTD. VS. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA VIDE ORDER DT. 16/10/2020 BY THE ITAT CHANDIGARH BENCH A, CHANDIGARH. IT WAS ALSO STATE D THAT THE ASSESSEE ALSO BELONGS TO THE SAME GROUP TO WHICH THE AFORESAID AS SESSEE I.E; M/S A.P REFINERY PVT. LTD. JAGRAON BELONGS, COPY OF THE SAID ORDER W AS FURNISHED WHICH IS PLACED ON RECORD. 7. IN HIS RIVAL SUBMISSIONS THE LD. DR ALTHOUGH SUP PORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW BUT COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE AFOR ESAID CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 8. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IT IS NOTICED THA T AN IDENTICAL ISSUE HAVING SIMILAR FACTS HAS ALREADY BEEN ADJUDICATED BY THE I TAT, CHANDIGARH BENCH A, CHANDIGARH VIDE ORDER DT. 16/10/2020 IN THE AFORESA ID REFERRED TO CASE AND THE RELEVANT FINDINGS HAVE BEEN GIVEN AT PARA 14 OF THE SAID ORDER WHICH READ AS UNDER: 14. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. THE ISSUE BEFOR E US RELATES TO ADDITION MADE TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF CASH FOUND SHORT WITH THE ASSESSEE. CASH SHORT, AT THE MOST REPRESENTS EXPENSES / OUTGOINGS OUT OF CASH AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE NOT ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE. SUCH UN ACCOUNTED EXPENSES ARE SOURCED FROM CASH AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESEE. HOW THEREFO RE CAN THEY BE TREATED OR DEEMED TO BE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 69/69B/69C OF THE AC T WHEN THE SAID SECTIONS DEEM INVESTMENTS/MONEY, THE SOURCE OF WHICH THE ASSESSEE OFFERS NO EXPLANATION ABOUT, AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE . WE THEREFORE HOLD THAT THERE IS NO CASE FOR MAKING ANY ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF CASH FOUND SHORT WITH THE ASSESSEE AND THE ADDITION SO MADE OF RS.9,06,522/- IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. SO RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID REFERRED TO ORDER DT. 16/10/2020 IN THE CASE OF M/S A.P. REFINERY PVT. LTD. VS. THE DCIT, C ENTRAL CIRCLE-1 LUDHIANA, THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,07,282/- MADE BY THE A.O. AND SU STAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS DELETED. 9. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21/01/2021 ) SD/- SD/- .. .., (R.L. NEGI ) ( N.K. SAIN I) $ %&/ JUDICIAL MEMBER ! / VICE PRESIDENT AG DATE:21/01/2021 (+! ,-.- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. $ / CIT 4. $ / 01 THE CIT(A) 5. -2 45&456789 DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 8:% GUARD FILE