ACIT, Circle - 4, Kolkata V. M/s. RNT Plantation Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1804/KOL/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2547 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-06-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 26-05-2010
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 19-09-2008
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PIYUSH KOLHE
• Keywords: Assessment record

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : KOLKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SRI D. K. TYAGI, JM & HONBLE SRI C. D. RAO , AM] I.T.A. NO.1804/KOL/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, -VS- M/S. R N T PLANTATION LTD. CIRCLE-4, KOLKATA. (PA NO.AABCR 1876 K) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SRI PIYUSH KOLHE RESPONDENT BY : SMT. NILIMA JOSHI O R D E R PER D. K. TYAGI, JM: THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AG AINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), KOLKATA DATED 16.07.2008 FOR ASSESSMENT YEA R 2004-05 ON THE SOLE GROUND OF DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.16,04,204/- U/S. 40 A(2) OF THE I. T. ACT. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE AS OBSERVED FROM THE ASS ESSMENT ORDER ARE THAT THE AO MADE THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.16,04,204/- U/S. 40A(2) ON ACCOUNT OF EXCESS PURCHASE PRICE PAID TO BORPHUKAN TEA CO. LTD. TREATING THE SAME AS EXCESSIVE AND UNREASONABLE AND ALSO ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, BILLS, VOUCHERS, BANK STATEMENTS. IN APPEAL, THE LD. CIT( A) DELETED THE SAID ADDITION. AGGRIEVED BY THE SAID ORDER, NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, THE LD. DR REL IED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO AND ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RE LIED ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WHILE GIVING R ELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE HAS OBSERVED AS UNDER : 3.2. I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE SUBMISSION OF THE AR. OF THE APPELLANT AND ALSO GONE THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. IT IS ALSO NOTICED FR OM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE DISALLOWANCE ON THE GROU ND THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, BILLS, VOUCHERS, BANK ST ATEMENTS. HOWEVER THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS FURTHER MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORD ER AS UNDER: IN RESPONSE SHRI I.K.HOLANI, APPEARED AS A.R FROM TIME TO TIME AND PRODUCED BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, BILLS, VOUCHERS ETC AND FILED DE TAILS. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY CONTINUES THE SAME BUSINESS AS IN THE EARLIER YEAR. THE CASE IS DISCUSSED WITH HIM. THE A.O. HAS FURTHER MENTIONED IN PAGES 2 OF THE AS SESSMENT ORDER AS UNDER: 2 DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING FOR A.Y.2003-04, A PA RTY WISE PURCHASE GIVING QUANTITY AND COST OF GREEN LEAF PURCHASED WAS PROVI DED. IT IS, THEREFORE, CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED DETAILS AS REQUIRED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT THE TIME OF HEARING WHICH IS EVIDENT FRO M THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. IT IS ALSO NOTICED THAT THE RECOVERY PERCENTAGE OF TEA MADE FR OM THE TEA LEAVES PURCHASED FROM NYEIJONG T.E. BELONGING TO BORPHUKAN TEA CO. LTD. I S ABOVE 23% WHEREAS THE RECOVERY PERCENTAGE OF TEA PRODUCED FROM GREEN LEAF PURCHASE D FROM OTHER GARDENS IS VARYING BETWEEN 20 TO 22%. THIS CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE RECO VERY PERCENTAGE OF TEA LEAF PURCHASED FROM BORPHUKAN TEA CO. LTD. IS DEFINITELY HIGHER COMPARED TO OTHERS. THEREFORE I AM INCLINED TO ACCEPT THE SUBMISSIONS O F THE A.R OF THE APPELLANT AND ACCORDINGLY THE ADDITIONS OF RS.16,04,204/- IS HERE BY ORDERED TO BE DELETED. ACCORDINGLY GROUND NO.2 IS ALLOWED. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, THE LD. DR QUESTI ONED THE FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) THAT ASSESEE PRODUCED BEFORE THE AO THE BOOKS OF A CCOUNTS, BILLS, VOUCHERS AND PARTY WISE PURCHASES GIVING QUANTITY AND COST OF GREEN LE AF PURCHASED . TO VERIFY THE SAME ASSESSMENT RECORDS WERE CALLED FOR AND SEEN IN THE OPEN COURT AND THE FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) WAS FOUND TO BE CORRECT. IN VIEW OF THIS WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE SAME IS HEREBY UPHELD. TH E APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS, THEREFORE, DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIS MISSED. 6. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 25.6.201 0 SD/- SD/- (C. D. RAO) (D. K. TYAGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 25TH JUNE, 2010 COPY TO : 1. ACIT, CIRCLE-4, KOLKATA. 2. M/S. R N T PLANTATION LTD., 1&2, OLD COURT HOUSE CO RNER, KOLKATA-700 001. 3. CIT(A), KOLKATA. 4. CIT, KOLKATA. 5. D.R., ITAT, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR JD.(SR.P.S.) I.T.AT., KOLKATA