Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6440 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
11 month(s) 9 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
02-03-2017
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted
DB
Assessment Year
2011-2012
Appeal Filed On
23-03-2016
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM SMC BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO , HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 134 / VIZ /201 6 (ASST. YEAR : 20 11 - 1 2 ) SRI KIRAN PANIGRAHI, PROP. KIRAN WINES, D.NO. 8 - 1 - 209, WARD NO.8, VARADAVARI STR EET, AMADALAVALASA, SRIKAKULAM. V S. IT O , WARD - 1, SRIKAKULAM. PAN NO. BHMPP 5202 K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI C. SUBRAHMANYAM FC A. DEPARTMENT B Y : SHRI M.K. SETHI SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 02 /0 3 / 2017 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02 /0 3 /201 7 . O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 2 , VISAKHAPATNAM , DATED 21 / 12 /201 5 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12 . 2. FACTS ARE IN BRIEF THAT T HE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF IMFL (INDIAN M ADE FOREIGN LIQUOR) . THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME BY DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 3,28,261/ - . THE RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS PROCESSED U/S 143 (1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED AS 'THE ACT'). LATER , AFTER FOLLOWING THE DUE PROCEDURE, ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S . 143(3) OF THE ACT BY ESTIMATING INCOME AT 20% OF THE STOCK PUT TO SALE . 2 ITA NO. 134 /VIZ/2016 (SHRI KIR AN PANIGRAHI) 3. ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) GRANTED A PAR TIAL RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE BY SCALING DOWN THE PERCENTAGE FROM 20% TO 10% AND DIRECTED THE A.O. TO RE - COMPUT E THE INCOME AT 10% OF PURCHASE PRICE. 4 . ON BEING AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE CARRIED MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE L D. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL WHERE THE TRIBUNAL HAS SCALED DOWN THE ESTIMATION OF PROFIT FROM 10% TO 5% IN THE CASE OF TANGUDU JOGISETTY IN ITA NO.96/VIZAG/2016 BY ORDER DATED 2.6.2016. 5 . ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. D.R. STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER S PASSED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 6 . I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE OR DERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS ESTIMATION OF PROFIT IN RESPECT OF IMFL BUSINESS CARRIED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN THIS RESPECT, THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF TANGUDU JOGISETTY (SUPRA) HAS CONSIDERE D THE PROFIT LEVEL IN THE LINE OF BUSINESS AND DECIDED THAT 5% OF PURCHASE PRICE IS REASONABLE PROFIT MARGIN IN THE LINE OF IMFL BUSINESS AND DIRECTED THE A.O. TO RE - COMPUTE THE PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE ORDER IS EXTRACTED AS UND ER: 8. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE A.O. ESTIMATED NET PROFIT OF 20% ON STOCK PUT FOR SALE. THE A.O. WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT MAINTA INED PROPER BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND VOUCHERS IN SUPPORT OF PURCHASES AND SALES. THE A.O. FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO MAINTAIN STOCK REGISTERS AND BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT SUSCEPTIBLE FOR VERIFICATION, THEREFO RE REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND ESTIMATED NET PROFIT OF 20% BY RELYING UPON THE DECISION OF HONBLE A.P. HIGH COURT. IT IS THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE NET PROFIT ESTIMATED BY THE A.O. IS QUITE HIGH WHEN 3 ITA NO. 134 /VIZ/2016 (SHRI KIR AN PANIGRAHI) COMPARED TO THE NATURE OF BUSINESS CARRIED ON BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE CASE LAW RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE. THE CASE BEFORE THE HONBLE A.P. HIGH COURT WAS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS INTO THE BUSINESS OF TRADING IN AR RACK, WHEREAS IT IS IN THE BUSINESS OF DEALING IN IMFL. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER CONTENDED THAT IMFL TRADE WAS CONTROLLED BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT THROUGH A.P. STATE BEVERAGES CORPORATION LTD. AND THE PRICES OF THE PRODUCTS ARE FIXED BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT. THE ASSESSEE BEING A LICENSE HOLDER OF STATE GOVERNMENT CANNOT SELL THE PRODUCTS OVER AND ABOVE THE MRP FIXED BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT. WE FIND FORCE IN THE ARGUMENTS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE REASON THAT THE A.O. HAS ESTIMATED THE NET PROFIT BY RELYING UPO N THE DECISION OF A.P. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. R. NARAYANA RAO IN ITA NO.3 OF 2003 WHICH IS RENDERED UNDER DIFFERENT FACTS. THE A.P. HIGH COURT HAS CONSIDERED THE CASE OF AN ARRACK DEALER, WHEREAS, THE ASSESSEE IS INTO THE BUSINESS OF DEALING IN IMFL. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE A.O. WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN RELYING UPON THE JUDGEMENT, WHICH WAS RENDERED UNDER DIFFERENT FACTS TO ESTIMATE THE NET PROFIT. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE, RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF ITAT, V ISAKHAPATNAM BENCH IN THE CASE OF T. APPALASWAMY VS. ACIT IN ITA NO.65 & 66/VIZAG/2012. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE CASE LAWS RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE LIGHT OF THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE AND FINDS THAT THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL, UNDE R SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES HELD THAT ESTIMATION OF 5% NET PROFIT ON PURCHASES IS REASONABLE. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE ORDER IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER: 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AS WELL AS OTHER MATERIALS O N RECORD. IT IS THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. A.R. THAT THE ESTIMATION OF PROFIT AT 16% IS HIGH AND EXCESSIVE CONSIDERING THE NORMAL RATE OF PROFIT IN THIS LINE OF BUSINESS. WHEREAS, THE LD. D.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). HAVING CONSIDERED THE SUBM ISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ISSUE IS NO MORE RES INTEGRA IN VIEW OF A SERIES OF DECISIONS OF THE ITAT HYDERABAD BENCH IN SIMILAR CASES. THE COORDINATE BENCH IN CASE OF ITA NO.127/HYD/12 AND OTHERS DATED 18.05.2012 AS WELL AS A NUM BER OF OTHER CASES HAVE HELD THAT PROFIT IN CASE OF BUSINESS IN INDIAN MADE FOREIGN LIQUOR HAS TO BE ESTIMATED AT 5% OF THE PURCHASES MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE ITAT HYDERABAD BENCH, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ESTIMATE THE PROFIT FROM THE WINE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE BY APPLYING THE RATE OF 5% OF THE PURCHASES MADE NET OF ALL OTHER DEDUCTIONS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHOULD ALSO BEAR IN MIND THAT IN NO CASE THE INCOME DETERMI NED SHOULD BE BELOW THE INCOME RETURNED. 9. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE AND ALSO RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE RATIOS OF COORDINATE BENCH, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE NET PROFIT ESTIMATED BY THE A.O. BY RELYING UPON THE DECISION OF HONBLE A.P. HIGH COURT (SUPRA), WHICH WAS RENDERED UNDER DIFFERENT FACTS IS QUITE HIGH. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE ASSESSEE RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF COORDINATE BENCH AND THE COORDINATE BENCH UNDER SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES ESTIMATED THE NET PROFIT OF 5% ON TO TAL PURCHASES NET OF ALL DEDUCTIONS. NO CONTRARY DECISION IS PLACED ON RECORD BY THE REVENUE TO TAKE ANY OTHER VIEW OF THE MATTER THAN THE VIEW SO 4 ITA NO. 134 /VIZ/2016 (SHRI KIR AN PANIGRAHI) TAKEN BY THE COORDINATE BENCH. THEREFORE, WE DIRECT THE A.O. TO ESTIMATE THE NET PROFIT OF 5% ON TOTAL PURC HASES NET OF ALL DEDUCTIONS. ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 7 . IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL, I DIRECT THE A.O. TO RE - COMPUTE THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT 5 % OF PURCHASE PRICE. ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 8 . WITH REGARD TO THE ISSUES OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT AND INTEREST RECEIVED FROM BANK, THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT HE DOES NOT WANT TO PRESS THESE GROUNDS. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS NOT RAISED ANY OBJECTION. IN VIEW OF THE SUBMISSION OF LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE , THESE GROUNDS ARE DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 9 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PU RPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON TH IS 02 ND DAY OF MARCH, 201 7 . S D/ - ( V. DURGA RAO ) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 02 ND MARCH , 201 7 . VR/ - COPY TO: 1 . THE ASSESSEE - SRI KIRAN PANIGRAHI, PROP. KIRAN WINES , D.NO. 8 - 1 - 209, WARD NO.8, VARADAVARI STREET, AMADALAVALASA, SRIKAKULAM. 2 . THE REVENUE ITO, WARD - 1, SRIKAKULAM. 3 . THE CIT - 2, VISAKHAPATNAM. 4 . THE CIT(A) - 2, VISAKHAPATNAM. 5 . THE D.R. 6 . GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY , I.T.A.T., VISAKHAPATNAM .
Mehul