The ACIT, Circle-8, Surat V. M/s. Crown, Surat

ITA 1534/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9760 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 27-01-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 12-07-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DINESH SINGH
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IT A NO. 1 534 / AHD/ 201 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 9 - 10 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD A BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM : PRAMOD KUMAR AM AND S S GODARA JM] I TA NO. 1534 /AHD/201 2 A SSESSMENT Y EAR : 20 0 9 - 10 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, .APPELLANT CIRCLE 8, SURAT . VS. CROWN , . RESPONDENT H.NO.57/67 R.S. NO.404/1/2, BHUMBAWADI, KATARGAM, SURAT. [ P AN: ABFFS 4806 A ] APPEARANCES BY: DINESH SINGH , FOR THE A PPELLANT NONE , FOR THE RESPONDENT D ATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING: JANUARY 27 TH , 201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNC ING THE ORDER : JANUARY 28 TH , 201 6 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR , AM : 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 18 TH APRIL, 201 2 , PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 9 - 1 0 , ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : - 1 T HE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS IN ACCEPTING T HE BOOKS RESULTS OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS REJECTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 145(3) OF THE ACT AND DIRECTING TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.17,30,000/ - M ADE ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSION OF JOB WORK INCOME. 2. T H E LD . CIT (A) OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE A SSESSING O FFICER CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE ASSES SEE ITSELF HAD SUBMITTED T HAT IT WAS CARRYING ON BUSINESS ACTIVITY OF CUTTING AND POLISHING OF DIAMONDS WHEN AS PER THE TERMS WITH IT S PRINCIPAL M/S. BHAV A NI GEMS A ND ST A R IMPEX ASSESSEE WAS TO CARRY OUT MARKETING , IT A NO. 1 534 / AHD/ 201 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 9 - 10 PAGE 2 OF 2 PLANNING, LASER SAWING AND ASSORTING OF ROUGH DIAMOND A ND NOT CUTTING AND POLISHING OF DIAMONDS. 3 . THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN T HE CIR CUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT U/S. 145(3) OF THE ACT AND MAKING ADDITION OF SUPPRESSED J OB WORK INCOME CONSIDERING THE DIVERGENCE IN THE BUSINESS ACTIVITY CA RRIED OUT IN VIOLATION OF THE TERMS WITH IT S PRINCIP AL M/S. BHAVANI G E MS AND ST A R IMPEX. 4. I T IS THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) BE SET - ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER RESTORED. 2. WE HAVE NOTICED THAT THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVE D IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/ - . IN VIEW OF THIS UNDISPUTED FACT AND IN THE LIGHT OF CBDT CIRCULAR NO.21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THIS APPEAL IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN FOR THE SIMPLE REAS ON THAT TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/ - . 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL IS DISMISSED. P RONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 28 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2016. SD/ - SD/ - S S GODARA P RAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) DATED: THE 28 TH DAY OF JANUARY , 201 6 . PBN/ * COPIES TO : (1) THE APPE LLANT ( 2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) ( 5) DR (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD