The ACIT, Circle-6, Ahmedabad V. Shiv Shakti Specific Family Trust, Ahmedabad

ITA 1556/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 51002 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 16-12-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 02-06-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B L YADAV
• Assessee Lawyers: S N SOPARKAR
• Keywords: Assessment record

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JM AND SHRI A. MOHAN A LANKAMONY, AM) ITA NO. 1556/AHD/2011 A. Y.: 2005-06 THE A. C. I. T., CIRCLE-6, 2 ND FLOOR, C. U. SHAH BUILDING, ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD VS SHIV SHAKTI SPECIFIC FAMILY TRUST, PROP. NIRAV LAMINATES 146 TO 149 MAHALAXMI INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, SANAND VIRAMGAM HIGHWAY,AHMEDABAD PA NO. AABTS 0633C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO. 1557/AHD/2011 A.Y.: 2005-06 THE A. C. I. T., CIRCLE-6, 2 ND FLOOR, C. U. SHAH BUILDING, ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD VS NAVDURGA SPECIFIC FAMILY TRUST, PROP. NAVDURGA PACKAGING INDUSTRIES, NATRAJ INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, OPP. UMA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, SANAND, AHMEDABAD PA NO. AAATN 0704 A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI B. L. YADAV, DR RESPONDENT BY SHRI S. N. SOPARKAR, AR DATE OF HEARING: 16-12-2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 23-12-2011 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI: BOTH THE APPEALS BY THE REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST DIFFERENT ORDERS OF THE LEARNED CI T(A)-XI, AHMEDABAD DATED 18-03-2011 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 -06 AGAINST BOTH THE ABOVE ASSESSEES. ITA NO.1556 AND 1557/AHD/2011 THE ACIT, CIRCLE-6, AHMEDABAD VS SHIIV SHAKTI SPECI FIC FAMILY TRUST THE ACIT, CIRCLE-6, AHMEDABAD VS NAVDURGA SPECIFIC FAMILY TRUST 2 2. IN BOTH THE APPEALS THE REVENUE CHALLENGED THE D ELETION OF ADDITIONS BEING DIFFERENCE IN GROSS RECEIPTS AS SHO WN IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS PER TDS CERTIFICATE AND VIOLATION OF RUL E 46A (3) OF THE IT RULES. BOTH THE PARTIES MAINLY ARGUED IN ITA NO.155 6/AHD/2011 AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE IS SAME IN BOTH THE APPEAL S AND ORDER IN THIS CASE MAY BE FOLLOWED IN THE OTHER CASE. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOT H THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE FINDINGS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND C ONSIDERED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. ITA NO.1556/AHD/2011 4. IN THIS CASE, THE REVENUE CHALLENGED THE DELETI ON OF ADDITION OF RS.55,89,377/- BEING DIFFERENCE IN GROSS RECEIPTS AS PER BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND AS PER TDS CERTIFICATES AND ALSO CHALL ENGED VIOLATION OF RULE 46A(3) OF THE IT RULES IN THE MATTER. 5. IT IS BRIEFLY NOTED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT O RIGINAL ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED ON 15-12-2008 MAKING THE SAME ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN GROSS RECEIPTS AS PER BOOK S AND THE TDS CERTIFICATES. THE MATTER REACHED THE LEARNED CIT(A) AS WELL AS TRIBUNAL AND IN THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL THE MATTER WAS RESTORED TO THE AO TO VERIFY THE RECONCILIATION FROM ASSESSMENT RECORD AND ALSO CALLING FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED IN THE MATTER. THE AO IN THE SET ASIDE PROCEEDINGS AGAIN MADE THE SAME ADDITION BECAUSE AC CORDING TO THE AO THE DIFFERENCE WAS NOT EXPLAINED. THE ASSESSEE S UBMITTED RECONCILIATION NOT ONLY BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) B UT ALSO EXPLAINED ITA NO.1556 AND 1557/AHD/2011 THE ACIT, CIRCLE-6, AHMEDABAD VS SHIIV SHAKTI SPECI FIC FAMILY TRUST THE ACIT, CIRCLE-6, AHMEDABAD VS NAVDURGA SPECIFIC FAMILY TRUST 3 THAT SIMILAR RECONCILIATION WAS FILED BEFORE THE AO VIDE LETTER DATED 23-06-2009. THE LEARNED CIT(A) CONSIDERING THE RECO NCILIATION STATEMENT NOTED THAT THE ADDITION IS UNWARRANTED AN D ADDITION WAS ACCORDINGLY DELETED. 6. THE LEARNED DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE AO A ND SUBMITTED THAT NO RECONCILIATION WAS FILED BEFORE THE AO; THE REFORE, ADDITION WAS CORRECTLY MADE. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED COUN SEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND REFERRED TO PB-13 WHICH IS DETAILED REPLY FILED BEFORE THE AO DATED 23-06-2009 ALONG WITH DOCUMENTS (PB-13 TO PB-78). HE HAS ALSO REFERRED TO PB-79 WHICH IS APPEAL EFFECT G IVEN BY THE AO TO THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) DATED 28-08-2009 IN WHICH THE AO HAS REFERRED TO THE RECONCILIATION SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE BUT ON OTHER REASONS CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ACCEPTE D. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT SINCE COMPLETE DETAILS WERE FILED BEFORE THE AO RECONCILING THE GR OSS RECEIPTS AS PER THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND THE TDS CERTIFICATES, THE REFORE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) ON PROPER APPRECIATION OF THE FACTS RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADDITION AND THERE IS NO VIOLATION OF RULE 46A (3) OF THE IT RULES. 7. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PE RUSAL OF THE DETAILS SUBMITTED IN THE PAPER BOOK, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. THE LEARNED CIT(A) RIGHTLY NOTED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE NOT ONLY FURNI SHED RECONCILIATION BEFORE HIM BUT ALSO FILED BEFORE THE AO. ON RECONCILIATION, NO DIFFERENCE WAS FOUND. THE LEARNE D COUNSEL FOR THE ITA NO.1556 AND 1557/AHD/2011 THE ACIT, CIRCLE-6, AHMEDABAD VS SHIIV SHAKTI SPECI FIC FAMILY TRUST THE ACIT, CIRCLE-6, AHMEDABAD VS NAVDURGA SPECIFIC FAMILY TRUST 4 ASSESSEE REFERRED TO THE DETAILS SUBMITTED BEFORE T HE AO (PB-13 TO PB-78 AND PB-79) WHICH CLEARLY SUPPORT THE FINDINGS OF THE LEARNED CIT(A). SINCE IT IS A DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL AND NO MA TERIAL IS PRODUCED BEFORE US TO REBUT THE FINDINGS OF THE LEARNED CIT( A), WE DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICATION TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF TH E LEARNED CIT(A). NO RULE 46A (3) OF THE IT RULES HAS BEEN VIOLATED IN T HE MATTER. DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL HAS NO MERIT AND IS DISMISSED. ITA NO.1557/AHD/2011 8. THE ISSUE IS SAME IN THIS APPEAL AS IS CONSIDERE D IN ITA NO.1556/AHD/2011. BY FOLLOWING THE SAME ORDER, WE D ISMISS THE APPEAL. 9. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT SD/- SD/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER LAKSHMIKANT/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER D Y. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD