M/s. Fazlani Synthetics, Surat V. The Income tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Surat

ITA 1283/AHD/2007

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8653 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-03-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 09-03-2010
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 28-03-2007
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M C
• Keywords: Rejection of books of accounts
• Section: 234B

Judgement Text

ITA.1283-07 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH C AHMEDABAD BEFORE S/SHRI T.K. SHARMA, JM AND D.C.AGRAWAL, AM M/S. FAZLANI SYNTHETICS, 704, 7 TH FLOOR,J.K.TOWER B/H.SUB-JAIL, KATODARA, SURAT. VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1), AAYAQKAR BHAVAN, MAJURA GATE, SURAT. PAN NO.AAAFF 4725 H (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY :- NONE. RESPONDENT BY:- MR.M.C. PANDIT,SR.D.R. O R D E R PER SHRI D.C. AGRAWAL. J.M. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE O RDER DATED 21.12.2006 PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A)-II, SURAT ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS :- I. REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS :- (1) THE LD. CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE APPELLANT. (2) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE BOO K RESULT OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED. ITA NO. 1283/AHD/2007 ASST. YEAR :2001-02 ITA.1283-07 2 II. GROSS PROFIT ADDITION: - (1) THE LEARNED CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING ESTIMAT ION OF GROSS PROFIT AT 10% WHEN THERE WAS NO BASIS FOR SUC H AN ADDITION. (2) THE APPELLANT HAVING MAINTAINED COMPLETE QUANTI TATIVE RECORDS THERE IS NO BASIS FOR MAKING ANY ADDITION. III. SHORTAGE OF STOCK :- (1) THE LEARNED CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITIO N OF RS.16,26,514/- ONLY ON THE BASIS OF STATEMENT OF PA RTNER RECORDED UNDER COERCION BEFORE THE EXCISE AUTHORITI ES AT THE TIME OF EXCISE ACTION ON 19.02.2001 AND IMMEDIA TELY RETRACTED ON 20.02.2001. (2) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES THERE WAS NO JUS TIFICATION FOR SUSTENANCE OF ANY ADDITION WHICH IS REQUIRED TO BE DELETED. IV. MISCELLANEOUS :- (1) THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE DELETED CHARGE OF INTEREST U/S. 234B OF THE ACT. 2. IN THIS CASE, NOTICE FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING ON 9-3-2010 WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE THROUGH REGISTERED POST. THIS NOTICE IS RETURNED BACK BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES WITH THE REMARKS NOT KNOWN . THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT INTIMATED THE CORRECT/CHANGED ADDRESS TO THE TRIBUN AL. 3. IN VIEW OF THIS, WE HAVE NO OPTION BUT TO PRESUM E THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING ITS APPEAL. ITA.1283-07 3 4. THE LAW ASSIST THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND NOT TH OSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEIR RIGHTS. THIS PRINCIPLE IS EMBODIED IN THE WEL L KNOWN DICTUM VIGILANTIBUS, NON DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT. 5. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PR OVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, AS WERE CONS IDERED IN 32 ITD 320 (DELHI) IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD. , WE TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UNADMITTED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED IN LI MINE. SD/- SD/- (T. K. SHARMA ) (D.C.AG RAWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD, DATED : 12-03-2010 PATKI. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)- 4. THE CIT CONCERNS. 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT, AHMEDABAD. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 12-03-2010