A.C.I.T., Circle-1(1), Aligarh V. Sh. Inder Jeet Singh, Aligarh

ITA 158/AGR/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0335 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-03-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 07-03-2013
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 19-04-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 158/AGRA/2012 ASSTT. YEAR : 2008-09 A.C.I.T., CIRCLE 1(1), VS. SHRI INDER JEET SINGH , ALIGARH. GOLDEN ROADWAYS SERVICE, BARADWARI, ALIGARH. (PAN : AVKPS 3210 K) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI WASEEM ARSHAD, SR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 07.03.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER : 15.03.2013 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), GHAZIABAD DATED 31.01.2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND : 1. LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DEL ETING THE ADDITION OF RS.50,95,157/- ON ACCOUNT OF LESS FREIG HT RECEIPT SHOWN AS PER 26AS BY ACCEPTING THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING A DOPTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND RECONCILIATION ACCEPTED DURING APPELLA TE PROCEEDING WHICH ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING DESPITE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY PROVIDED. ITA NO. 158/AGRA/2012 2 2. BRIEFLY, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSE SSEE HAS SHOWN IN TRADING AND PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT, THE FREIGHT RECEIVED OF RS.11,20,93,813/- WHEREAS AS PER AST INFORMATION AVAILABLE (AS ON COMPUTER DATA BANK OF THE DEPARTMENT DETAILS UPLOADED BY THE PARTIES WHICH HAVE DEDUCTED TDS), THE FREIGHT BEING PAID IS RS.11,71,88,970/- IN ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL. THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS CALLED FOR WHY ADDITION SHOULD NOT BE MADE OF DIFFERENCE OF FREIGHT RECEIPTS LESS SHOWN IN A SUM OF RS.50,95,15 7/-. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED BEFORE THE AO THAT HE IS ENGAGED IN THE TRANSPORTAT ION OF GAS FOR PSUS AND PAYMENTS ARE MADE FOR EACH HALF MONTH AFTER GAP OF ABOUT 25 DAYS AND IN CERTAIN CASES PAYMENT IS MADE BY THEM ON MONTHLY BA SIS. ALL THE RECEIPTS HAVE BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND ALL THE ENTRIES ARE MADE ON THE BASIS OF RECEIPT OF FINAL PAYMENT ADVICE FROM PARTI ES. THE AO, HOWEVER, DID NOT ACCEPT THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND MADE ABO VE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN FREIGHT RECEIPTS. THE ADDITION WAS CH ALLENGED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND ASSESSEE FILED DETAILS OF RECONCILIATION TO SHO W THAT THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN THE RECEIPTS AND ONLY SEVEN DAYS TIME WAS GIVEN TO RECONCILE THE FIGURES. THE DETAILED SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS FORWARDED T O THE AO AND THE AO VIDE HIS REMAND REPORT DATED 20.01.2012 REPRODUCED AT PA GE 21 & 22 OF THE APPELLATE ORDER AFTER VERIFYING THE ASSESSEES CLAIM OF RECON CILIATION ON THE ABOVE ISSUE, ACCEPTED THE RECONCILIATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, WHICH IS SUPPORTED BY ITA NO. 158/AGRA/2012 3 VOUCHERS FOR VERIFICATION AND THE CLAIM OF THE ASSE SSEE WAS FOUND TO BE CORRECT. THE LD. CIT(A), CONSIDERING THE RECONCILIATION STAT EMENT AND REMAND REPORT OF THE AO IN WHICH THE AO HAS ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF AS SESSEE DELETED THE ENTIRE ADDITION. 3. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE FACTUAL FACTS NOTED IN T HE REMAND REPORT AND FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A), WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL. THE ADDITION WAS MADE BY THE AO BECAUSE THE DIFFERE NCE IN THE FREIGHT RECEIPTS COULD NOT BE RECONCILED BEFORE HIM, BUT AT THE APPE LLATE STAGE, THE AO ACCEPTED THE RECONCILIATION STATEMENT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, WHEN THE AO ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION. IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE, IT IS MERELY STATED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) SHOULD NOT ACCEPT THE RECONCILIATION AT THE APPELLATE STAGE WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO PRODUCE AT THE ASSESSMENT ST AGE. THIS ITSELF IS SUFFICIENT TO DISMISS THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL BECAUSE THE CIT(A) HAS CO-TERMINUS POWERS TO THAT OF THE AO. THEREFORE, WHEN THE LD. CIT(A) CONS IDERED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERIT BY GIVING OPPORTUNITY TO THE AO T O FILE THE REMAND REPORT AND WHEN IN THE REMAND REPORT THE AO ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE RECONCILING THE FIGURE OF FREIGHT, THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT SHOUL D NOT HAVE PREFERRED THE ITA NO. 158/AGRA/2012 4 PRESENT APPEAL. THUS, THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS NO T MAINTAINABLE AND IS FILED WITHOUT ANY BASIS. THE SAME IS, THEREFORE, DISMISSE D. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS DISMIS SED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (A.L. GEHLOT) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A), CONCERNED BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY TRUE COPY