1 ITA NO.111/RAN/13 - AM - M/S. JAI HANUMA N RICE MILL,D BAD INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CIRCUIT BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI H.L. KARWA, PRESIDENT , AND HON'BLE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT M EMBER ITA NO . 111 /RAN/2013 A.Y 2009 - 10 M/S.JAI HANUMAN RICE MILL VS. A.C.I.T, RANGE - 1, DHANBAD DHANBAD, PAN: AADFJ0463B ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) FOR THE APPELLANT : S/ SH RI S.K PODDAR & M.K CHOUDHURY, ADVOCATES, LD.ARS FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI CHOUDHURY ORAM, JCIT/LD.DR DATE OF HEARING : 2 5 - 11 - 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 2 5 - 11 - 201 4 ORDER SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT M EMBER : THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINS T THE ORDER DATED 03 - 09 - 2013 PASSED BY LD CIT(A), DHANBAD AND IT RELATES TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF LD CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS RELATING TO BROKEN RICE. 2. WE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED TH E RECORD. THE ASSESSEE IS MILLING THE RICE FROM PADDY. THE DEPARTMENT CARRIED OUT SURVEY OPERATION AT THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 25.02.2009. DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY OPERATION, THE ASSESSEE OFFERED ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS.5.00 LAKHS. A T THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING, THE AO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SOLD BROKEN RICE @ RS.900/ - PER QUINTAL IN THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY, 2009. HOWEVER, IN THE MONTH OF MARCH 2009, THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED TO HAVE SOLD 385 QUINTALS @ RS.450/ - PER QUINTA L. HENCE THE CLOSING STOCK OF 130 QUINTALS OF BROKEN RICE WAS ALSO VALUED BY THE ASSESSEE @ RS.450/ - PER QUINTAL. BY CONSIDERING THE SELLING RATE OF RS.900/ - REALISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 2009, THE AO 2 ITA NO.111/RAN/13 - AM - M/S. JAI HANUMA N RICE MILL,D BAD DISBELIEVED THE CLAIM OF SELLING RATE OF RS.450/ - PER QUINTAL SHOWN IN MARCH 2009. ACCORDINGLY, THE AO ENHANCED THE VALUE OF CLOSING STOCK OF BROKEN RICE BY RS.58,500/ - AND ALSO ADDED A SUM OF RS.1,73,250/ - TOWARDS SUPPRESSION ON SALE OF BROKEN RICE EFFECTED IN MARCH 2009. THE LD CIT(A) ALSO CONFIRMED BOTH THE ADDITIONS. 3. WE NOTICE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THAT IT HAS SOLD THE INFERIOR QUALITY OF BROKEN RICE IN THE MONTH OF MARCH 2009 AND THE CLOSING STOCK ALSO CONSISTED OF OLD STOCK OF SPOILED RICE. ACCORDINGLY, IT WAS SU BMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS CONSTRAINED TO SELL THEM AT LOWER RATE AND HENCE THE CLOSING STOCK WAS ALSO VALUED AT LOWER RATE. HOWEVER, WE NOTICE THAT THE LD CIT(A) DID NOT EXAMINE THE SAID CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. THUS, WE NOTICE THAT THE TAX AUTHORITIES HAVE MADE THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS ON SURMISES WITHOUT BRINGING ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD TO DISPROVE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES , IN OUR VIEW, BOTH THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED, AS THEY DO NOT H AVE ANY SUPPORTING MATERIAL. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A) ON THE ABOVE SAID ISSUES AND DIRECT THE AO TO DELETE BOTH THE ADDITIONS REFERRED ABOVE. 4. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO CONTESTING THAT THE INTEREST U/S 234A AND 234B SHOULD BE CHARGED ON THE RETURNED INCOME. IN THIS REGARD, WE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO FOLLOW THE BINDING DECISION OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 5 - 11 - 20 14 SD/ - SD/ - [ H.L. KARWA ] [ B.R. BASKARAN ] PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE: 2 5 .11.2014 3 ITA NO.111/RAN/13 - AM - M/S. JAI HANUMA N RICE MILL,D BAD PLACE : RANCHI PP, SPS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT : M/S. JAI HANUMAN RICE MILL C/O S.K. PASARI & CO. 102 LUXMI BHAWAN, MITHU ROAD, BANK MORE, DHANBAD - 826001. 2 THE RESPONDENT: ACIT,CIR - 1,AAYKAR BHAWAN, LUBY CIRCULAR ROAD, DHANBAD - 826001. 3. .THE CIT, 4.THE CIT(A), 5.DR, ITAT CIRCUIT B ENCH, RANCHI 6. GUARD FILE. TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, ASSTT. REGISTRAR 4 ITA NO.111/RAN/13 - AM - M/S. JAI HANUMA N RICE MILL,D BAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION ............. 2 5 - 11 - 2014 ....................... 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DIC TATING MEMBER ........................OTHER MEMBER ....... 26 - 11 - 2014 ........................ 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P.S./P.S. ..................... 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRON OUNCEMENT................... 2 5 - 11 - 14 .................................................................. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. P.S./P.S ................ 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK ....................... ................ 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ......................................... 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER ........................................................... ...................................... 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER ..............................................................