Parle Sales and Services Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-5(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 1689/AHD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6940 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 05-04-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 22-05-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P M MEHTA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : B BENCH : AHMEDABAD (BEFORE HONBLE SHRI T.K. SHARMA, J.M. & HON' BLE SHRI N.S.SAINI, A.M . ) I.T.A. NO. 1689/AHD./2009 : ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-2006 PARLE SALES AND SERVICES PVT. LTD. -V S- I.T.O., WARD-5(1), AHMEDABAD (PAN: AAACP 9019R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI P.M. MEHTA, A.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K. MADHUSUDAN, SR.D. R O R D E R PER SHRI N.S.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-XI, AHMEDABAD DATED 24.03.2009. 2. THE SOLE GROUND OF APPEAL TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS APPEAL IS THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) ERRED IN UPHOLD ING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF PRIOR PERIOD EXPENS ES OF RS.4,75,221/-. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE CL AIMED A DEDUCTION FOR PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES OF RS.4,75,221/- IN THE COMPUTATION OF INC OME WHICH WAS DISALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH ANY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM THAT THE SAID EXPENSES ARE CRYSTALLIZED D URING THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. 4. ON APPEAL, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA X(APPEALS) ALSO CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR THE VERY SAME RE ASON. 5. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE ASSESS EE HAD FILED DETAILED LEDGER COPY OF PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES WHICH CONTAINED THE NARRATION OF THE EXPENSES FROM WHICH THE NATURE OF EXPENSES COULD BE DECIPHERED. IT COULD ALSO BE ASCE RTAINED THAT THE EXPENSES ARE CRYSTALLIZED DURING THE YEAR. THE SAID DETAILS, COPIES OF WHICH HAVE BEEN FILED BEFORE US, ARE AT PAGES 1 TO 2 ITA NO. 1689-AHD-2009 23 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE A SSESSING OFFICER, WITHOUT EXAMINING THE DETAILS AND EVIDENCES, HAS DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. BOTH THE PARTIES ADMITTED THAT IT SHALL BE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE TO RESTORE T HE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION, AFTER VERIFICATION. WE, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH, AFTER VERIFICATION, AS PER LAW AND AF TER ALLOWING REASONABLE AND PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05.04.2 011. SD/- SD/- (T.K. SHARMA) (N.S.SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 05/04/2011 COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1) THE ASSESSEE 2) THE DEPARTMENT. 3) CIT(A.) CONCERNED, 4) CIT CONCERNED, 5) D.R., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. TRUE COPY BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR, I TAT, AHMEDABAD TALUKDAR/SR.P.S.