The ACIT,Vapi Circle, Vapi V. Prima Family Trust, Daman

ITA 1592/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 159220514 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 03-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 20-07-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAMIR VAKIL
• Assessee Lawyers: PF JAIN
• Keywords: Loose papers; Principle of natural justice; Question of law
• Section: 143(3); 80IB

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD D BENCH BEFORE: S H RI PRAMOD KUMAR , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHR I S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, VAPI CIRCLE, VAPI (APPELLANT) VS PRIMA FAMILY TRUST, PROP. OF PRIMA FRUIT PRODUCTS, 55 - A, PANCHAL UDYOGNAGAR, BH IMPORE, NANI DAMAN, PAN: AAATP7074R (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : S H RI SAMIR VAKIL , SR. D . R. ASSESSEE BY: S H RI P.F. JAIN , A.R. DATE OF HEARING : 04 - 11 - 2 015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27 - 11 - 2 015 / ORDER P E R : S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER : - THE S E THREE REVENUE S APPEAL S FOR A.Y. 2004 - 05 , 2006 - 07 & 2009 - 10 ARISE FROM ORDER OF THE CIT(A), VALSAD DATED 29 - 03 - 2012, 31 - 03 - 2012 & 18 - 05 - 2012 IN APPEAL NO S. CIT(A)/VLS/390 /09 - 10 , CIT(A)/VLS/398/08 - 09 & CIT(A)/VLS /385/11 - 12; RESPECTIVELY , IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT . I T A NO . 1445, 1446 & 1592 / A HD/20 12 A Y 200 4 - 05, 2006 - 07 & 2009 - 10 I.T.A NO S.1445,1446 & 1592 /AHD /2012 A.Y 2004 - 05,2 006 - 07 & 2009 - 10 PAGE NO ACIT VS. PRIMA FAMILY TRUST PROP. OF PRIMA FRUIT PRODUCTS 2 2. WE PROCEED ASSESSMENT YEAR - WISE FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AND BREVITY. THE REVENUE S SOLE SUBSTANTIVE GROUND IN ITA 1445/AHD/2012 FOR AY 2004 - 05 CHALLENGES THE LOWER APPELLATE ORDER DELETING UNEXPLAINED INCOME ADD ITION OF RS. 14,57,906/ - . C ASE FILE REVEALS THE INSTANT APPEAL TO BE ARISING FROM A SURVEY EXERCISE. THIS ASSESSEE - TRUST IS THE PROPRIETOR M/S. PRIMA FRUIT PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING FRUIT AND EDIBLE PREPARATIONS IN BULK QUANTITIES. ITS MANUFACTURING FACILITY LOCATED AT DAMAN IS COVERED UNDER VIIITH SCHEDULE ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S. 80IB OF T HE ACT. IT APPEARS TO HAVE COMMENCED ITS MANUFACTURING ACTIVITIES FROM THE IMPUGNED ASSE SSMENT YEAR. 3. THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN ON 31 - 10 - 2004 DECLARING NIL INCOME. THE ASSESSING OFFICER TOOK UP SECURITY . HE FRAMED A REGULAR ASSESSMENT ON 28 - 12 - 2006 ASSESSING TOTAL INCOME O F RS. 11,61,37,60/ - INCLUDING AN ADDITION OF RS. 85,64,140/ - BASED ON LOOSE PAPERS IMPOUNDED IN THE COURSE OF SURVEY. THIS LATTER FIGURE COMPRISED THE SUM OF RS. 14,57,906/ - IN QUESTION INVOLVING RS. 6,07,597/ - AND RS. 8,50,309/ - BASED ON THE IMPOUNDED LOOSE PAPERS. THE CIT(A) UPHELD ASSESSING OFFICER S ACTION IN HIS ORDER DATED 15 - 06 - 2007. THE ASSESSEE CAME TO THE TRIBUNAL. A CO - ORDINATE BENCH IN ITS ORDER DATED 16 - 05 - 2008 EXAMINED ALL LOOSE SHE ETS LEADING TO THE ABOVE STATED ADDITION AT THREADBARE. IT CAME TO CONCLUSION THAT THE IMPUGNED SUM OF RS. 14,57,906/ - DESERVED TO BE RE - ADJUDICATED AT ASSESSEE S O FFICER S LEVEL. ADDITION AMOUNT OF RS. 69,85,082/ - STOOD I.T.A NO S.1445,1446 & 1592 /AHD /2012 A.Y 2004 - 05,2 006 - 07 & 2009 - 10 PAGE NO ACIT VS. PRIMA FAMILY TRUST PROP. OF PRIMA FRUIT PRODUCTS 3 DELETED BEING BASED ON MERE DUMB DOCUMENTS NOT REVEALING ANY UNDISCLOSED INCOME. THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS. 1,21,152/ - ONLY WAS CONFIRMED. 4. THE AS SESSING OFFICER TOOK UP CONSEQUENTIAL PROCEEDINGS . HE QUOTED ABOVE STATED CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS, REFERRED TO ASSESSEE S FAILURE IN FILING SUPPORTIVE AND PLAUSIBLE EXPLANATION FOR INVOKING PRESUMPTION U/S. 292C OF THE ACT RESULTING IN THE IMPUGNED ADDITION OF RS. 14,57,906/ - IN ORDER DATED 20 - 12 - 2009. 5. THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL. THE CIT(A) ACCEPTED ITS PRAYER AND SOUGHT REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY. THE SAME CAME ON 23 - 26/08/2010 REITERATING THE ADDITION IN QUESTION. THE ASSESSEE F ILED ITS WR ITTEN SUBMISSIONS EXPLAINING ENTRIES IN LOOSE SHEET IMPOUNDED AS UNDER: - 'KINDLY REFER TO THE VARIOUS LOOSE PAPERS IN RESPECT OF WHICH ADDITION HAS BEEN SET ASIDE BY THE HON'BLE ITAT AND FURNISHED TO THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DATED 10/12/2009. IN THIS CONNECTION WE HAVE BEEN DIRECTED TO FURNISH THE EXPLANATION OF THE SAID LOOSE PAPERS AS UNDER; ANNEXURE/PAGE NO./PAPER BOOK PAGE NO. AMOUNT EXPLANATION BF - 1 PAGE 2 966/ - FROM THIS LOOSE PAPER NOW FURNISHED TO THE ASSESSEE IT IS SEEN THAT THERE IS NAME OF AMBICA STEEL TRADERS WITH TELEPHONE NO. AND MOBILE NO. AND VORA BROS. WITH TELEPHONE NO. THE PAPER IS UNDATED AND UNSIGNED AND THERE IS NO MENTION OF ANY AMOUNT OR I.T.A NO S.1445,1446 & 1592 /AHD /2012 A.Y 2004 - 05,2 006 - 07 & 2009 - 10 PAGE NO ACIT VS. PRIMA FAMILY TRUST PROP. OF PRIMA FRUIT PRODUCTS 4 DATE OR RS.966/ - . THEREFORE IT IS A DUMB PAPER AND NO ADDITION IS CALLED FOR. IN TH E ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER ITSELF ALSO IT IS MENTIONED THAT THE PAPER IS UNDATED. BF - 1 PAGE 81 BF - 1 PAGE 83 15,506/ - 24,824/ - THESE TWO LOOSE PAPERS GIVE THE DETAILS OF VARIOUS BILLS WITH AMOUNT ON THE LETTER HEAD OF BHARAT TRADERS AND THE DATE OF LOO SE PAPER 81 MENTIONED IS 30/03/2004 AND ON PAGE NO. 83 DATE IS MENTIONED IS 23/02/2004. ALI THESE BILLS STAND ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE ACCOUNT OF BHARAT TRADERS FROM THE I BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE IS ENCLOSED HEREWITH. AS THE BILL AM OUNTS ARE ALREADY ACCOUNTED FOR THE QU ESTION OF ADDITION OF RS.15, 506 AND 24, 824/ - MADE IN THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER DOES NOT ARISE. BF - 1 PAGE 87 82,627/ - FROM THE PERUSAL OF LOOSE PAPER IT IS SEEN THAT IT IS UNDATED, UNSIGNED, AND THERE IS NO M ENTION OF ANY MONETARY TRANSACTION ON THE PAPER. THERE IS MENTION OF SOME FIGURES IN SQUARES AND IN CIRCLE AND THERE IS NO AMOUNT WHATSOEVER MENTIONED THEREIN. THEREFORE IT IS A ROUGH AND DUMB DOCUMENT HAVING NO VALUE AND IT IS NO T KNOWN HOW THE AMOUNT OF RS.82, 627/ - HAS BEEN ARRIVED AT. THERE BEING NO MONEY AMOUNT MENTIONED, THE QUESTION OF ANY ADDITION SHOULD NOT ARISE. BF - 7 PAGE 61 5,08,496/ - FROM PAGE NO.61 NOW FURNISHED IT I.T.A NO S.1445,1446 & 1592 /AHD /2012 A.Y 2004 - 05,2 006 - 07 & 2009 - 10 PAGE NO ACIT VS. PRIMA FAMILY TRUST PROP. OF PRIMA FRUIT PRODUCTS 5 IS NOT KNOWN AS TO HOW THE AMOUNT OF RS.5,08,496/ - HAS BEEN ARRIVED AT. ON THE PAPER THERE IS MENTION OF NAME OF AKSHAR INDUSTRIES, SHRADHHA, AND BR FABRICATION SHOWING THE OUTSTANDING DETAILS OF BILLS OF THEM. FURTHER THERE IS MENTIONED OF NAME BHIMJIBHAI, DEEPAK SHAH AGAINST WHOSE NAME THE WORD 'TO BE TAKEN' HAS BEEN M ENTIONED AND THE FIGURE OF 6000/ - HAS BEEN CANCELLED WITHOUT ANY DATE THERE ON. THE PAPER IS UNDATED AND UNSIGNED AND HAS NO VALUE. AKSHAR INDUSTRIES: THE TRANSACTION WITH THIS PARTY HAS BEEN DULY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND TDS ON PAYMENT HAS ALSO B EEN MADE THIS IS A REGULAR TRANSACTION AND THEREFORE THE ADDITION MADE WAS WRONG AND THERE IS NO UNDISCLOSED AMOUNT REQUIRING ANY ADDITION THEREOF. THE COPY OF ACCOUNT OF THE PARTY FROM BOOKS ALONG WITH COPY OF BILL IS ATTACHED HEREWITH. AT THE CLO SE OF TH E YEAR AMOUNT OF 28,360/ - IS OUTSTANDING IN THE ACCOUNT AS PAYABLE. SHRADHHA : THE TRANSACTIONS WITH THIS PARTY ARE ALSO DULY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS AND THEY ARE REGULAR TRANSACTIONS. THE ACCOUNT OF THE PARTY ALONG WITH THE COPY OF BILL RECEIVED FROM T HE PARTY IS ENCLOSED. THEREFORE ANY QUESTION OF ADDITION DOSE NOT ARISES. BR FABRICATION : THERE IS MENTION OF TOTAL BILL 1,58,830/ - WITH THE PAYMENT OF 1,05,600/ - AND AFTER TDS OF 3500/ - THE B ALANCE I.T.A NO S.1445,1446 & 1592 /AHD /2012 A.Y 2004 - 05,2 006 - 07 & 2009 - 10 PAGE NO ACIT VS. PRIMA FAMILY TRUST PROP. OF PRIMA FRUIT PRODUCTS 6 AMOUNT PAYABLE IS 49,730/ - . THE TRANSACTION WITH BR FABR ICATION ARE FULLY ACCOUNTED FOR, THEREFORE QUESTION OF ANY ADDITION DOSE NOT ARISE SIMILARLY PAYMENT TO BHIMJIBHAI IS ACCOUNTED FOR. THEN THERE IS MENTION OF JIGNESHBHAI FOR THE PETTY CASE BOOK MAINTAINED BY HIM WHICH IS ALSO DULY ACCOUNTED FOR AND REFLECTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS THE ADDITION OF RS.508496/ - WAS ERRONEOUS WITHOUT ANY DETAILS OF ITS COMPUTATION AND EVEN OTHERWISE ALSO THE TRANSACTIONS WITH THE CONCERNED PARTIES BEING DULY REFLECTED IN THE BOO KS, THE QUESTION OF ANY ADDITION DOES NOT ARISE. ADDITION OF RS.8,50.309/ - THIS ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE IN THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER IN RESPECT OF LOOSE PAPERS CONTENT IN BF - 1 PAGE 79, BF - 1 PAGE 83, BF - 1 PAGE 91, BF - 1 PAGE 89 AND BF - 16 PAGE 22A. A T THE OUTSET IT BROUGHT TO YOUR KIND NOTICE THAT BF - 1 PAGE 83 LOOSE PAPER RELATES TO BHARAT TRADERS AND THE TRANSACTION IN THIS REGARD ARE FULLY ACCOUNTED FOR WHICH EXPLANATION WITH DOCUMENTARY PROOF WAS DULY GIVEN DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ITSELF. RE MAINING LOOSE PAPERS PERTAIN TO BR FABRICATION AND THE TRANSACTIONS WITH BR FABRICATION ARE ALSO DULY ACCOUNTED FOR AND THESE LOOSE PAPERS CONTAIN REPETITIVE ENTRIES AND MULTIPLE ADDITIONS HAS BEEN MADE AND DETAILED EXPLANATION WAS DULY GIVEN AT THE TIME O F ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND THE SAME IS AGAIN REPRODUCED HEREUNDER. I.T.A NO S.1445,1446 & 1592 /AHD /2012 A.Y 2004 - 05,2 006 - 07 & 2009 - 10 PAGE NO ACIT VS. PRIMA FAMILY TRUST PROP. OF PRIMA FRUIT PRODUCTS 7 ANNEXURE/ PAGE NO. AMOUNT EXPLANATION BF - 1 - 79 24810 THIS PAPER IS THE ACCOUNT ON THE LETTER HEAD OF B.R. FABRICATION WHICH SHOWS BILL NO., AMOUNT AND DE TAILS OF PAYMENT RECEIVED. ON THIS ACCOUNT RECEIVED FROM THE PARTY, THERE IS A REMARK TO CHECK THIS AMOUNT TO SAFEGUARD AGAINST ANY DOUBLE PAYMENT AND TO CHECK ITEM RATE. ACCOUNT FROM THE BOOKS OF ASSESSEE DULY FURNISHED. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF ANY ADD ITION FOR THE A/C. OF THIRD PARTY DOES NOT ARISE. BF - 1 - 83 24824/ - THIS PAPER IS THE ACCOUNT ON THE LETTER HEAD OF BHARAT TRADERS WHICH SHOWS BILL NO., AMOUNT AND BILL DATE . THIS IS MEMORANDUM OF ACCOUNT FROM BHARAT TRADERS ON T HE BASIS OF WHICH NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE. ACCOUNT FROM THE BOOKS OF ASSESSEE DULY FURNISHED AND TRANSACTIONS ARE DULY RECORDED. BF - 1 - 91 192182/ - THE PAYMENTS RELATES TO B.R. FABRICATION WHICH ARE DULY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS FOR WHICH A/CS. WERE F URNISHED. THE ADDITION IS UNCALLED FOR. BF - 1 - 89 492943/ - ON THIS PAPER, THERE IS MENTION OF B.R. FABRICATION AND PAYMENT IS MADE BY CHEQUE WHICH IS ALSO MEN TIONED ON THE PAPER ITSELF. THE A/C. OF B.R. FABRICATION FROM THE BOOKS IS ATTACHED HEREW ITH AND THE AMOUNT /BILLS PASSED ARE DULY ACCOUNTED FOR .THE QUESTION OF ANY ADDITION ON THE BASIS OF THIS PAPER DOES NOT ARISE. I.T.A NO S.1445,1446 & 1592 /AHD /2012 A.Y 2004 - 05,2 006 - 07 & 2009 - 10 PAGE NO ACIT VS. PRIMA FAMILY TRUST PROP. OF PRIMA FRUIT PRODUCTS 8 BF - 16 - 22A 115550/ - ON THIS PAGE, THERE IS MENTION OF PAYMENTS TO B.R. FABRICATION WHICH ARE DULY ACCOUNTED FO R. ACCOUNT ATTACHED . TOTAL 850309/ - BF - 1 PAGE 79 ADDITION 24, 810/ - FROM THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSES AS PER ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER IT WILL BE SEEN THAT AMOUNT OF RS.3,56,342/ - HAS BEEN TREATED AS VERIFIABLE OUT OF RS. 3,81,152 / - AND DIFFEREN CE OF RS. 24,810/ - HAS BEEN TREATED AS NON VERIFIABLE. ACTUAL THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR ADDITION BECAUSE IN THE LOOSE PAPER NO.79 WHICH IS MEMORANDUM OF ACCOUNT ON THE LETTER HEAD OF BR FABRICATION AND THERE IS REMARK ON THIS LOOSE PAPER ITSELF AS UNDE R; 'MR.BHAVSAR HAS BEEN DIRECTED TO OBTAINED ORIGINAL BILLS FROM THE HO AND TO VERIFY WHETHER THERE IS ANY DUPLICATION AND THEREAFTER TO SEND FOR PAYMENTS. HE HAS ALSO TO CHECK ITEM RATE AGAINST QUOTATIONS AND THIS HAS BEEN SEND BY MR.JIQNESH SHAH. CEO OF THE COMPANY.' THEREFORE FROM THIS MEMORANDUM OF ACCOUNT NO ADVERSE VIEW CAN BE TAKEN WHEN TRANSACTIONS ARE DULY ACCOUNTED FOR. BF - 1 PAGE 91 ADDITION 1.92.182/ - FURTHER AS PER BF - 1 PA GE 91, ADDITION OF RS. 1,92,182/ - HAS BEEN MADE. THIS PAPER HAS ALSO B EEN EXPLAINED AS RELATING TO BR FABRICATION AND THE ENTRIES APPEARING ON THIS PAGE ALSO APPEAR ON BF - 1 PAGE 79 AND THERE IS MENTI ONED OF 9000/ - CHEQUE JPS AND MENTION OF 10600/ - OFFICE WHICH RELATES TO IMPREST PETTY CASE HANDLED BY MR. JP SHAH FROM WHICH N O ADDITION CAN BE MADE IN THE INCOME OF THE ASSE SSEE. SO THE ADDITION OF 192182/ - IS AGAIN CASE OF DOUBLE ADDITION BECAUSE THESE ENTRIES HAS ALREADY BEEN CONSIDERED AND INCLUDED IN BF - 1 PAGE 79 AS DISCUSSED ABOVE. BF - 1 PAGE 89 ADDITION 4.92.943/ - I.T.A NO S.1445,1446 & 1592 /AHD /2012 A.Y 2004 - 05,2 006 - 07 & 2009 - 10 PAGE NO ACIT VS. PRIMA FAMILY TRUST PROP. OF PRIMA FRUIT PRODUCTS 9 I T IS N OT KNOWN HOW THIS AMOUNT 492943/ - HAS BEEN DETERMINED, DETAILS OF WHICH MAY KINDLY BE FURNISHED. HOWEVER IT IS A UNIQUE CASE OF MULTIPLE ADDITION WHICH IS POINTED OUT AS UNDER; THIS PAPER AGAIN RELATES TO BR FABRICATION FOR WHICH PAYMENT HAS ALREADY BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS. ON THE TOP OF THE PAGE THERE IS CLEAR MENTION OF CHEQUE NUMBER, NAME OF THE BANK AND THE AMOUNT THEN ALSO THE ADDITION HAS BEEN M ADE. THESE PAYMENTS OF RS.36900/ - , 32550/ - AND 25800/ - IS DULY REFLECTED AS PAYMENT IN THE ACCOUNT OF BR FABRICATION. AGAINST FIGURE OF 1 4800/ - THERE IS A ROUND , THERE IS CROSS AND THERE IS A REMARK PAID OR NOT WITH QUESTION MARK, THEREFORE NO COGNIZANCE CA N BE TAKEN OF THIS AMOUNT. TOTAL OF THIS FOUR FIGURES COMES TO 110050/ - . AGAIN THERE IS AN ADDITI ON FOR THIS TOTAL ALSO. SO TOTAL AMOUNT OF 110050/ - HAS BEEN DUPLICATED. FURTHER BELOW THE PAGE THERE IS TOTAL OF 88000/ - WHICH HAS ALSO BEEN ADDED, WHICH IS THE TOTAL OF INDIVIDUAL PAYMENTS WITH DATE, SO APPARENTLY THERE IS AGAIN DUPLICATE ADDITION OF 880 00/ - . THESE INDIVIDUAL ENTRIES AGGREGATING 88000/ - ARE AGAIN REFLECTED ON BF - 1 PAGE 79. THE ENTRIES OF 4000/ - , 50 00/ - , 5000/ - , 10000/ - AND 12000/ - ARE ALSO REFLECTED ON THE BF - 1 PAGE 79. FROM THESE FACTS IT WILL BE APPRECIATED THAT THE ENTIRE ADDITION OF 4,92,943/ - IS A CASE OF MULTIPLE ADDITION AND THE ENTRIES APPEARING ON THE PAGE HAVE ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED ON BF - 1 PAGE 79 AND THEREFORE THE ENTIRE ADDITION IS DUPLICATION AND WRONGLY MADE. THE ENTRIES ARE REFLECTED IN LOOSE PAPER BF - 1 PAGE 79. THEREFORE ALL THE ENTRIES OF THIS PAGE STAND EXPLAINED. B F - 16 PAGE 22A ADDITION 1,15, 550/ - THIS AGAIN RELATES TO BR FABRICATION AND THIS IS AGAIN A CASE OF MULTIPLE ADDITION BECAUSE ALL THESE FOUR ENTRIES OF BILL NO.36,3 7,39 AND 42 TOTALING RS. 110050/ - APPEARS ON PAGE NO.89 AND THESE BILLS ARE DULY REFLECTED IN THE ACCOUNT OF BR FABRICATION AND SO THERE WAS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR MAKING ANY ADDITION WHICH IS NOTHING BUT DUPLICATION AND THE TRANSACTIONS ARE DULY RECORDED. AS PER ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER IT WILL BE SEEN THAT FOR BF - 1 PAGE 79, THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN EXPLANATION THAT THIS RELATES TO M/S. BR FA BRICRATION AND OUT OF RS.381152/ - T OTAL FOR BILLS RAISED RS.356342/ - WERE ACCEPTED AS VERIFI ABLE AND DIFFERENCE OF RS.24810/ - W AS ADDED. ENTRIES APPEARING ON BF - 1 PAGE 91, BF - 1 PAGE 89 AND BF - 16 PAGE I.T.A NO S.1445,1446 & 1592 /AHD /2012 A.Y 2004 - 05,2 006 - 07 & 2009 - 10 PAGE NO ACIT VS. PRIMA FAMILY TRUST PROP. OF PRIMA FRUIT PRODUCTS 10 22A FOR WHICH ADDITION OF RS.800675/ - HAS BEEN MADE RELATE TO ENTRIES WHICH ARE ALREADY APPEARING IN BF - 1 PAGE 79 AND AS DISCUSSED ABOVE FOR THESE LOOSE PAPERS THERE IS DUPLICATION OF ADDITION OF SO MANY ENTRIES. AS TH ESE ENTRIES ARE ALREADY COVERED IN LOOSE PAPER BF - 1 PAGE 79, THE QUESTIO N OF FURTHER ADDITION OF 800675/ - DOSE NOT ARISE, THEREFORE THE SAME MAY KINDLY BE CANCELLED. SO IN THE NET ANALYSIS IT WILL BE APPRECIATED THAT THERE WAS NO JUSTIFICAT ION FOR ADDITIO N OF RS.8,50,309/ - BASED ON LOOSE PAPER NUMBER BF - 1 PAGE 79, PAGE 83, PAGE 91, PAGE 89 AND BF - 16 PAGE 22A. IN VIEW OF ABOVE FACTS THE ADDITION OF RS.6,07,597/ - BASED ON LOOSE PAPERS NUMBER 3F - 1 PAGE 2, PAGE 81, PAGE - 87 AND BF - 7 PAGE 61 AND ADDITION OF RS. 850309/ - AS DISCUSSED ABOVE MAY KINDLY BE DELETED FROM THE ASSESSE D INCOME AS PER ORIGINAL ORDER. IF ANY FURT HER DETAILS / CLARIFICATION ARE REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE MAY KINDLY BE INTIMATED ACCORDINGLY.' THE COPIES OF LOO SE PAPERS AND THE SUPPORTING EXPLAI NING THESE LOOSE PAPERS HAVE BEEN PLACED ON PAPER BOOK PAGE NO. 31 TO 113. FROM THE DETAILED EXPLANATION OF EACH LOOSE PAPER WITH SUPPORTING AND DETAILED IN SUBMISSION DATED 21/12/2009 IT WILL BE APPRECIATED THAT THERE WAS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR ADDITION ON THE BASIS OF THESE LOOSE PAPERS WHICH ARE DULY EXPLAINED BEYOND DOUBT. THE LOOSE PAPERS ARE EITHER DULY ACCOUNTED FOR OR THESE ARE DUMB LOOSE PAPERS FOR WHICH NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE AND SUCH TYPE OF ADDITION HAS BEEN DELETED BY THE ITAT ITSELF AS EVIDENT FROM ITS ORDER FOR THE A.Y.2004 - 05 ITSELF. FROM THE EXPLANATION IT WILL ALSO BE APPRECIATED THAT MANY ENTRIES ARE REPETITIVE ENTRIES RESULTING INTO MULTIPLE ADDITIONS AS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS SUBMISSION DATED 21/12/2009. IN THE NET ANALYSIS IT IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT AFFORDED THE REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY THEREBY THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE HAS BEEN VIOLATED. ON MERITS ALSO THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN DETAILED EXPLANATION EXPLAINING EACH AND EVERY LOOSE PAPERS AND POIN TING OUT THAT THERE WAS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR ANY ADDITION BUT UNFORTUNATELY EXPLANATIONS HAS NOT BEEN CONSIDERED AND AFTER SERVING NOTICE ON 16/12/2009 THE ORDE R HAS BEEN PASSED ON I.T.A NO S.1445,1446 & 1592 /AHD /2012 A.Y 2004 - 05,2 006 - 07 & 2009 - 10 PAGE NO ACIT VS. PRIMA FAMILY TRUST PROP. OF PRIMA FRUIT PRODUCTS 11 20/12/2009 EVEN THOUGH THE MATTER WAS GETTING TIME BARRED ON 31/12/2009 AND DELAY WAS NOT ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS KINDLY CONSIDER THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSE IN ITS PROPER PERSPECTIVE AND OBLIGE. A PERUSAL OF THE CASE FILE REVEALS THAT ASSESSEE INTER ALIA RAISED THREE ARGUMENTS IN LOWER APPELLATE PRO CEEDINGS. FIRST ONE WAS THAT THE VERY SUM ALREADY STOOD INCLUDED IN ASSESSING OFFICER S CONSEQUENTIAL ORDER PASSED ON 28 - 08 - 2008. ITS SECOND ARGUMENT REITERATED THE ABOVE STATED EXPLANATION. THIRD CONTENTION WAS TO THE EFFECT THAT ITS CASE WAS ALREADY E NTITLED FOR SECTION 80IB DEDUCTION. AND THERE WAS NO NEED TO INFLATE THE EXPENSES IN QUESTION ACCORDINGLY . THE CIT(A) AGREES TO ASSESSEE S SECOND AND THIRD ARGUMENTS. THIS LEAVES THE REVENUE AGGRIEVED. 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES. CASE FILE PERUSED. RELEVANT FACTS NARRATED IN PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS ARE NOT REPEATED FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY. THE ISSUE IN HAND IS ABOUT CORRECTNESS OF UNEXPLAINED INCOME ADDITION OF RS. 14,57,906/ - BASED ON LOOSE PAPERS IMPOUNDED DURING SURVEY. THE CIT(A) HAS DULY SOUGHT REMAND REPORT FROM ASSESSING AUTHORITY. THE SAME DOES NOT EVEN DEAL WITH ASSESSEE S SPECIFIC EXPLANATION QUA EACH AND EVERY DOCUMENT AS EXTRACTED HEREINABOVE. THIS VERY FACTUAL POSITION CONTINUES BEFORE US AS WELL. THE REVENUE IS UNABLE TO REBUT ASSESSE E S EXPLANATION QUA EACH AND EVERY LOOSE SHEET. SOME OF THEM ARE ALSO STATED TO HAVE BEEN DULY ACCOUNTED IN BOOKS. WE ACCORDINGLY ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY INTERFERED WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER S ACTION IN I.T.A NO S.1445,1446 & 1592 /AHD /2012 A.Y 2004 - 05,2 006 - 07 & 2009 - 10 PAGE NO ACIT VS. PRIMA FAMILY TRUST PROP. OF PRIMA FRUIT PRODUCTS 12 DELETING THE IMPUGNED UNEXP LAINED INCOME ADDITION. THE REVENUE S ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT OF SOLE SUBSTANTIVE GROUND ACCORDINGLY FAILS . OUR THESE FINDINGS ON MERITS RENDER ASSESSEE S REMAINING TWO ARGUMENTS AS HAVING BECOME INFRUCTUOUS. ITA 1445/AHD/2012 IS REJECTED. 7. WE COME TO AS SESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07 INVOLVING 1446/AHD/2012. THE REVENUE S FIRST SUBSTANTIVE GROUND SEEKS TO RESTORE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSED PRODUCT ION OF RS. 1,76,04,489/ - . THE ASSESSING OFFICER REFERRED TO ASSESSEE S REGULAR ASSESSMENT FRAMED IN THE YEAR 2 004 - 05 INVOLVING SIMILAR ISSUE DECIDED UPTO THE TRIBUNAL WHEREIN THE LEARNED CO - ORDINATE BENCH MEMBERS HAD VISITED THE MANUFACTURING UNIT IN QUESTION. HE ACCORDINGLY WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MANUFACTURED DRIED POWDER AND THE DIFFERENCE IN UNA CCOUNTED SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION WAS 95,159 KG VALUED @ RS. 185 PER KG RESULTING IN THE IMPUGNED ADDITION COMING TO RS. 1,76,04,489/ - . THE CIT(A) OBSERVES THAT THE TRIBUNAL S EXERCISE WAS LIMITED TO THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR ONLY. HE IS FURTHER OF THE O PINION THAT NEITHER ASSESSEE S BOOKS HAVE BEEN REJECTED NOR IS THERE ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD POINTING TOWARDS SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION. HE GOES ON TO ACCEPT ASSESSEE S ARGUMENT THAT IT ENJOYS 100% DEDUCTION U/S. 80IB AND THERE IS NO NEED IN THESE FACTS TO SUP PRESS 26% OF THE TOTAL PRODUCTION SHOWN. THE CORRESPONDING GROUND RAISED STANDS ACCEPTED IN THE LOWER APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. I.T.A NO S.1445,1446 & 1592 /AHD /2012 A.Y 2004 - 05,2 006 - 07 & 2009 - 10 PAGE NO ACIT VS. PRIMA FAMILY TRUST PROP. OF PRIMA FRUIT PRODUCTS 13 8. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTION AND GONE THROUGH THE CASE FILE. IT EMERGES FROM THE CASE FILE THAT A CO - ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEE S OWN CASE IN PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR ITA 1636/AHD/2010 DECIDED ON 22 - 03 - 2013 HAS REJECTED REVENUE S IDENTICAL CONTENTION ON THE GROUND THAT IT ALREADY ENJOYS 100% DEDUCTION U/S. 80IB OF THE ACT AND THEREFORE, THERE WAS NO LOGIC AS TO WHY IT WOULD SUPPRESS ITS PRODUCTION/RAW MATERIAL FOR GENERATING PROFITS WHICH ARE NOT EXEMPT. IT FURTHER EMA NATES THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR ITSELF HAS FRAMED REASSESSMENT ON 25 - 03 - 2014 ACCEPTING ASSESSEE S CONTENTION THAT WHEN ITS PROFITS ARE ALREADY EXEMPT, THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT TO SUPPRESS THE PRODUCTION BY FOLLOWING THE ABOVE STATED TRIBUNAL S DECISION. THE REVENUE FAILS TO POINT OUT ANY DISTINCTION ON FACTS OR LAW. WE ACCORDINGLY FOLLOW CO - ORDINATE BENCH DECI SION AND REJECT THIS FIRST SUBSTANTIVE GROUND. 9. THE REVENUE S SECOND SUBSTANTIVE GROUND CHALLENGES THE CIT(A) S ORDER ALLOWING SCRAP SALE INCOME OF RS. 26,647/ - AS ELIGIBLE FOR SECTION 80IB DEDUCTION. THERE IS HARDLY ANY DISPUTE THAT THE HON BLE JURISD ICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN CASE OF CIT VS. HARJIVANDAS J HUTHABHAI ZAVERI (2002) 258 ITR 785 HAS DECIDED THE VERY SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW AGAINST THE REVENUE. WE DRAW SUPPORT THEREFROM AND REJECT THIS LATTER GROUND AS WELL. ITA 1446/AHD/2012 FAILS. I.T.A NO S.1445,1446 & 1592 /AHD /2012 A.Y 2004 - 05,2 006 - 07 & 2009 - 10 PAGE NO ACIT VS. PRIMA FAMILY TRUST PROP. OF PRIMA FRUIT PRODUCTS 14 10 . THIS LEAVES US WITH ITA 1592/AHD/2012. THE REVENUE RAISES TWO SUBSTANTIAL GROUNDS OF SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION O F RS. 79,30,602/ - AND THE OTHER ONE BEING OF SCRAP SALE INCOME OF RS. 1,18,157/ - HELD ELIGIBLE FOR SECTION 80IB DEDUCTION. BOTH PARTIES ARE IN U NISON THAT OUR FINDINGS HEREINABOVE IN ITA 1446/AHD/2012 FOR AS SESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07 COVER THESE ISSUES. WE DRAW SUPPORT THEREFROM AND REJECT THESE TWO GROUNDS AS WELL. ITA 1592/AHD/2012 ALSO FOLLOWS SUIT. 11. THESE THREE REVENUE S APPEALS ITAS 1445, 144 6 AND 1592/AHD/2012 ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OURT ON 27 - 11 - 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( PROMOD KUMAR ) ( S. S. GODARA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 27 /11 /2015 AK / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,