ACIT, CHENNAI V. M/s. A D Jayaveera Pandia Nadar & Sons (Nagapattinam), CHENNAI

ITA 1861/CHNY/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 57900 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-01-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 17-11-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K E B RENGARAJAN JUNIOR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1861/MDS/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BUSINESS CIRCLE I, CHENNAI - 600 034 . (APPELLANT) V. M/S A D JAYAVEERA PANDIA NADAR & SONS (NAGAPATTINAM), NO.31, 3 RD MAIN ROAD, KOTTURPURAM, CHENNAI - 600 034. PAN : AAAFJ3044K (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI K.E.B. RENGARAJAN, JUNIOR STANDING COUNSEL RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 31.01.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31.01.2012 O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : IN THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE, AGAINST AN O RDER DATED 29.8.2011 OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-V I, CHENNAI, ITS GRIEVANCE IS THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O. ON SHORTAGE OF STOCK DUE TO WASTAGE OF ONION WAS DELETED BY LD. CIT(APPE ALS) . 2. FACTS RELATING TO THE ISSUE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E, IMPORTER AND EXPORTER OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCES, HAD CLAIMED SHOR TAGE OF STOCK OF 192.82 METRIC TONES ON A TOTAL PURCHASE OF 2133.580 METRIC TONES OF I.T.A. NO. 1861/MDS/2011 2 ONIONS. ARGUMENT OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT THE ONIO NS HAD TO BE CLEANED, SORTED AND DRIED AND GRADED MECHANIC ALLY AND THE WASTAGE WAS 10-15%. HOWEVER, A.O. WAS OF THE OPIN ION THAT THE WASTAGE HAD TO BE RESTRICTED TO 5% AND ACCORDINGLY, HE RESTRICTED THE CLAIM TO 5% WHICH RESULTED IN AN ADDITION OF ` 11,93,330/-. 3. IN ITS APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS), ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITS OWN CASE FOR ASSES SMENT YEARS 2006- 07 AND 2007-08 IN I.T.A. NOS. 326 & 327/MDS/2011 DA TED 25.3.2011 FOR ARGUING THAT WASTAGE AS CLAIMED SHOULD BE ALLOW ED. LD. CIT(APPEALS) WAS OF THE OPINION THAT WASTAGE AS REC ORDED IN THE BOOKS HAD TO BE ALLOWED IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDE NCE TO THE CONTRARY. HE, THEREFORE, DIRECTED THE A.O. TO ALLO W THE CLAIM OF SHORTAGE OF ONIONS AS RECORDED IN THE BOOKS. 4. NOW BEFORE US, LEARNED D.R. SUBMITTED THAT ONION S WASTAGE HAD TO BE RESTRICTED SINCE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSE E WAS MUCH ABOVE THE INDUSTRIAL AVERAGE. 5. PER CONTRA, LEARNED A.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) . 6. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE DESPITE THE SERVICE OF NOTICE. WE HAVE PERUSED THE ORDERS AND HEARD THE LEARNED D.R. I.T.A. NO. 1861/MDS/2011 3 THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07 AND 2007-08, THIS TRIBUNAL , VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 25.3.2011, HAD HELD THAT ACTUAL WASTAGE AS RE CORDED IN THE BOOKS WAS TO BE ALLOWED IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDE NCE TO THE CONTRARY. NOTHING WAS BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE LEA RNED D.R. TO SHOW THAT THE FACT SITUATION WAS DIFFERENT FOR THE IMPUG NED ASSESSMENT YEAR NOR WAS ANY EVIDENCE PRODUCED TO SHOW THAT THE ACTU AL WASTAGE WAS LESSER THAN WHAT WAS RECORDED IN THE BOOKS. WE ARE , THEREFORE, OF THE OPINION THAT LD. CIT(APPEALS) WAS JUSTIFIED IN FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THIS TRIBUNAL FOR THE PRECEDING ASSESSM ENT YEARS FOR ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. NO INTERFERENC E IS REQUIRED. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STAND S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON 31 ST JANUARY, 2012. SD/- SD/- (GEORGE MATHAN) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 31 ST JANUARY, 2012. KRI. COPY TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT(A)-VI, CHENNAI/ CIT-IV, CHENNAI/D.R./GUARD FILE