IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD B BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1129/HYD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 SHRI GANDURI KRUPAKAR (HUF), SURYAPET (PAN AIDPG 5943 R) VS THE ITO, SURYAPET APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. RAMA RAO RESPONDENT BY : SHRI M.H. NAIK DATE OF HEARING : 29.9.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12.10.2011 ORDER PER CHANDRA POOJARI, A.M. THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) VIJAYAWADA D ATED 30.3.2011 AND PERTAINS TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006- 07. 2. THE ASSESSEE RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS IN IT S APPEAL: 1. THE CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW . 2. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.14,72,21 8/- ON THE GROUND THAT THERE ARE EXCESS OF ASSETS OVER LIABILITIES WITHOUT PROPERLY CONSIDERING THE EXPLAN ATION SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF RS.5,38,585/- ON THE GROUN D THAT THERE IS DIFFERENCE IN THE STOCK. THE CIT(A) OUGHT ITA NO.1129/H/2011 M/S GANDURI KRUPAKAR (HUF), SURYAPET 2 TO HAVE ACCEPTED THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND DELETED THE ADDITION MADE. 4. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THERE IS ANY DE FICIT CASH IN THE CASH BOOK AND FURTHER ERRED IN CONFIRMI NG THE ADDITION OF RS.7,45,903/- ON THIS ACCOUNT. 5. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.39,617/- ON THE GROUND THAT THERE IS DIFFERENCE IN THE SUNDRY CREDITORS. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAS NOT GIVEN PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN THE DISCREPANCIES NOTICED BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE TURNOVER OF THE A SSESSEE IS ONLY RS.32,84,267/- AND THE ASSESSEE FALLS UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 44F AND AT ANY STRETCH OF IMA GINATION, THE PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE DETERMINED AT RS.28,96,435/-. THEREFORE, AN OPPORTUNITY MAY BE G IVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE DISCREPANCIES NOTICED B Y THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTAT IVE HAS RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN OUR OPINION, AN OPPORTUNITY IS TO BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLA IN THE DISCREPANCIES NOTICED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. AS CONTENDED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ITA NO.1129/H/2011 M/S GANDURI KRUPAKAR (HUF), SURYAPET 3 ASSESSEE BEING THE TURNOVER OF THE ASSESSEE IS AT RS.32,84,267/-, THE ASSESSEE FALLS UNDER THE PURVIE W OF SEC.44F. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE SET ASIDE THE ENTIRE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER W ITH A DIRECTION TO HIM TO GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSE SSEE TO EXPLAIN THE DISCREPANCIES NOTICED BY THE LOWER AUTH ORITIES. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 12.10.20 11 SD/- (G.C. GUPTA) SD/- (CHANDRA POOJARI) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED THE 12 TH OCTOBER, 2011 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. SHRI S. RAMA RAO, ADVOCATE, 3-6-643, SHRIYAS ELEGANCE, FLAT NO.102, ST. NO.9, HIMAYATNAGAR, HYDERABAD. 2. SHRI GANDURI KRUPAKAR (HUF, PROP. GANDURI SUDHEER LADIES & GENTS SHOW ROOM, SURYAPET-508 213. 3. THE ITO, SURYAPET 4. THE CIT(A) -VIJAYAWADA 5. THE CIT, HYDERABAD 6. THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD NP/TPRAO