Income-tax Officer, V. M/s. Gjalaxmi Steel (Jalna) Pvt. Ltd., Jalna

ITA 2024/PUN/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0405 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-11-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 13-11-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUHAS KULKARNI ITA NO P
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 69C; 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A , PUNE , , BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM . / ITA NO. 2071 /PN/20 1 4 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 1 0 - 11 M/S. RUTUJA ISPAT PVT. LTD., P.NO.D - 67, MIDC, JALNA . / APPELLANT PAN: AA CCR8562P VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3), JALNA . / RESPONDE NT . / ITA NO. 2023 /PN/201 4 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 1 0 - 1 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3), JALNA . / APPELLANT VS. M/S. RUTUJA ISPAT PVT. LTD., P.NO.D - 67, MIDC, JALNA . / RESPONDENT PAN: A ACCR8562P ASSESSEE BY : S HRI PRAMOD SHINGTE REVENUE BY : S/SHRI RAJEEV KUMAR, CIT & SUHAS KULKARNI ITA NO . 2071 / PN /201 4 ITA NO. 2023 /PN/201 4 ITA NO.2024/PN/2014 M/S. RUTUJA ISPAT PVT. LTD. & ANR 2 . / ITA NO. 2024 /PN/201 4 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 10 - 11 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 10 - 11 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3), JALNA . / APPELLAN T VS. M/S. GAJLAXMI STEEL (JALNA) PVT. LTD., P.NO.D - 6 8/2 , ADDL. MIDC AREA , JALNA . / RESPONDENT PAN: AA ECP3612N ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI GAURAV BATHAM, ADDL. CIT / DATE OF HEARING : 22 . 1 1 .201 6 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 30 . 1 1 .201 6 / ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM: OUT OF THIS BUNCH OF APPEALS, CROSS APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE REVENUE ARE AGAINST ORDER OF CIT( A ), AURANGABAD , DATED 25 . 0 8 .201 4 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11 AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) . FURTHER, ASSESSEE M/S. GAJLAXMI STEEL (JALNA) PVT. LTD. IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), AURANGABAD, DATED 25.08.2014 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11 AGAINST ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT. ITA NO . 2071 / PN /201 4 ITA NO. 2023 /PN/201 4 ITA NO.2024/PN/2014 M/S. RUTUJA ISPAT PVT. LTD. & ANR 3 2. THIS BUNCH OF APPEALS RELATING TO DIFFERENT ASSESSEE ON SIMILAR ISSUE WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE . 3 . THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 2071 /PN/201 4 HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : - GROUND NO. 1: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE HON'BLE CIT(A), AURANGABAD, ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DETERMINATION OF QUANTUM OF SUPPR ESSED PRODUCTION / SALE OF TMT BARS MERELY ON THE BASIS OF CONSUMPTION OF ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION / SALE OF TMT BARS MERELY ON THE BASIS OF CONSUMPTION OF ELECTRICITY UNIT. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT BASIS OF CONSUMPTION OF ELECTRICITY MAY KINDLY NOT BE TAKEN FOR DETERMINATION OF QUANTUM OF SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION AND ADDITIONS SO CONFIRME D MAY KINDLY BE DELETED . GROUND NO. 2: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE HON'BLE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF PROFIT ON SALE OF SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION TO THE TUNE OF RS.1,31,03,660. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ADDITION OF RS.1,31,03,660 ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION MAY KINDLY BE DELETED. GROUND NO.3: WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE GROUND AND ON THE FACTS AND IN THE WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE GROUND AND ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE HON'BLE CIT(A) ERRED IN ESTIM ATING GROSS PROFIT @ 4% ON SUPPRESSED SALE AS THE INCOME OF THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE INCOME OF THE APPELLANT ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION MAY KINDLY BE RESTRICTED TO THE GROSS PROFIT PERCENTAGE OF THE APPELLANT'S BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS . 4. THE REVENUE IN ITA NO. 2023 /PN/2014 HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : - 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN QUANTIFYING THE SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION @ 4% EVEN AFTER JUSTIFIED IN QUANTIFYING THE SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION @ 4% EVEN AFTER ACCEPTING THE FACT THAT T HE ASSESSEE INDULGED IN CLANDESTINE REMOVAL OF GOODS WITHOUT PAYMENT OF TAXES 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE WHETHER THE CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT MANUFACTURING AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES ON THE UNAC COUNTED PRODUCTION WORKED OUT IN THE APPELLATE ORDER HAD ALREADY BEEN BORNE BY THE PRODUCTION SHOWN IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS? 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE WHETHER THE CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE WORK ING CAPITAL IS REQUIRED FOR PURCHASE OF RAW MATERIAL AND DAY TO DAY ACTIVITIES FOR PRODUCTION OF GOODS EVERY YEAR. 4. THE ORDER OF THE AO BE RESTORED AND THAT OF THE CIT(A) BE VACATED. 4. THE ORDER OF THE AO BE RESTORED AND THAT OF THE CIT(A) BE VACATED. ITA NO . 2071 / PN /201 4 ITA NO. 2023 /PN/201 4 ITA NO.2024/PN/2014 M/S. RUTUJA ISPAT PVT. LTD. & ANR 4 5. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING TH E DETERMINATION OF QUANTUM OF SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION / SALE OF TMT BARS MERELY ON THE BASIS OF CONSUMPTION OF ELECTRICITY AND ALSO IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF PROFIT ON SALE OF SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION TO THE TUNE OF RS. 1,31,03,660/ - . THE ASSESSE E IS ALSO AGGRIEVED IN ESTIMATING GROSS PROFIT @ 4% ON SUPPRESSED SALE AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN QUANTIFYING THE PROFI T ON SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION @ 4%. FURTHER, THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER O F CIT(A) IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT THE WORKING CAPITAL WAS REQUIRED FOR PURCHASE OF RAW MATERIAL AND DAY - TO - DAY ACTIVITY FOR PRODUCTION OF GOODS. 7. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT THE ISSUE ARISING IN THIS CROSS APP EALS IS SQUARELY COVERED BY VARIOUS ORDERS OF TRIBUNAL. IT WAS FURTHER POINTED OUT BY THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR TRIBUNAL. IT WAS FURTHER POINTED OUT BY THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THERE IS NO ALLEGATION OF CLANDESTINE REMOVAL OF GOODS WITHOUT PAYMENT OF EXCISE DUTY AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY THE EXCISE DEPARTMENT AND NO PHYSICAL VERIFICATION HAD BEEN CARRIED OUT EITHER BY THE EXCISE OR INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT AS TO CONSUMPTION OF ELECTRIC UNITS PER METRIC TON. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT NO PETITION HAD BEEN FILED BEFORE THE SETT LEMENT COMMISSION OR THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, HENCE, THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE SAID ADDITION MADE IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE WHICH WAS PARTLY UPHELD BY THE CIT(A). 8. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER TO POINT OUT THAT IN VIEW OF ERRATIC CONSUMPTION OF ELECTRICITY, ADDITION IS WARRANTED. ITA NO . 2071 / PN /201 4 ITA NO. 2023 /PN/201 4 ITA NO.2024/PN/2014 M/S. RUTUJA ISPAT PVT. LTD. & ANR 5 9. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THIS IS THE CASE OF ROLLING MILLS, WHEREIN THE ADDITION WAS WORKED OUT IN THE HANDS O F THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF US STANDARDS . THE CASE OF ASSESSEE BEFORE US WAS THAT IN THE CASE OF PRESENT ASSESSEE, THERE WAS NO CASE OF ANY CLANDESTINE REMOVAL OF GOODS WITHOUT PAYMENT OF EXCISE DUTY BY THE EXCISE AUTHORITY OR EVEN BY THE INCOME TAX A UTHORITY DURING THE YEAR . FURTHER, NO DEMAND HAD BEEN RAISED BY THE CCE FOR ALLEGED SUPPRESSION OF PRODUCTION OR ANY PETITION WAS MOVED BEFORE THE DGCE I OR THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION. 10. ADMITTEDLY, IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE, THERE WAS NO ENQUIRY OR SEAR CH OR INVESTIGATION BY THE EXCISE DEPARTMENT DURING THE YEAR , UNDER WHICH ANY CASE OF SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION WAS DETECTED AND / OR CLANDESTINE REMOVAL OF GOODS WITHOUT PAYMENT OF EXCISE DUTY WAS MADE BY THE EXCISE DEPARTMENT. THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT MOVED ANY PETITION BEFORE ANY AUTHORITY OF EXCISE OR THE INCOME TAX AUTHORITY ADMITTING ANY CLANDESTINE REMOVAL OF GOODS WITHOUT PAYMENT OF EXCISE DUTY. THE SOLE BASIS FOR ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE WAS ADDITION MADE IN HANDS OF ASSESSEE AS IN EARLIER YEARS . THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE BASIS OF ADDITION MADE IN THE EARLIER YEARS HAD MADE THE ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF ESTIMATION OF PROFIT ON SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION, WHICH IN TURN, WAS BASED ON US STANDARDS . FURTHER, ADDITION WAS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF WORKING CAPITAL REQUIRED FOR INVESTMENT IN PURCHASE OF RAW MATERIAL AND OTHER EXPENSES. 11 . WE FIND THAT SIMILAR ISSUE OF ESTIMATION ON ACCOUNT OF ERRATIC CONSUMPTION OF ELECTRICITY AROSE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN BUNCH OF APPEALS. THE TRIBUNA L IN SHREE OM ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD. VS. ADDL. CIT IN ITA NOS.125 & 127/PN/2012 AND CROSS APPEALS IN ITA NOS.430 & 431/PN/2012, RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007 - 08 & 2008 - 09 VIDE ORDER DATED 15.07.2015 HAD CONSIDERED THE ISSUE AT LENGTH VIDE ITA NO . 2071 / PN /201 4 ITA NO. 2023 /PN/201 4 ITA NO.2024/PN/2014 M/S. RUTUJA ISPAT PVT. LTD. & ANR 6 PARAS 54 TO 87 AND VIDE PARAS 88 AND 89, THE TRIBUNAL HAD DELETED THE ADDITION ON BOTH COUNTS I.E. ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION AND ALLEGED INVESTMENT IN PURCHASES, WHICH READ AS UNDER: - 88. IN THE ENTIRETY OF THE ABOVE SAID FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANC ES, WE HOLD THAT NO EXTRAPOLATION OF SALES FOR 300 DAYS CAN BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF THE EVIDENCE FOUND FOR CLANDESTINE REMOVAL OF MATERIAL WITHOUT PAYMENT OF EXCISE DUTY FOR FEW DAYS, WHICH IN TURN, HAS BEEN ADMITTED BY THE ASS ESSEE BY WAY OF FILING PETITION BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, WHICH IN TURN, HAS ALSO BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION. MERELY BECAUSE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE OF ADDITIONAL EXCISE DUTY PAYABLE ON THE SAID CLANDESTINE REMOVAL OF MATERIAL WITHOUT PAYMENT OF EXCISE DUTY DOES NOT ESTABLISH THE CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT THE SAID FIGURES OF ADDITIONAL PRODUCTION SHOULD BE UTILIZED FOR EXTRAPOLATING THE SALES IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ENTIRE YEAR. ADMI TTEDLY, THE ASSESSEE HAD OFFERED ADDITIONAL INCOME ON THE SAID CLANDESTINE REMOVAL OF MATERIAL WITHOUT PAYMENT OF EXCISE DUTY, WHICH IS TO BE ADDED AS INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE FAIRLY ADMIT TED THAT IN CASE THE SAID ADDITIONAL INCOME HAS NOT BEEN ADDED WHILE COMPUTING THE INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE RESPECTIVE YEARS, THE SAME MAY BE DIRECTED TO BE ADDED IN THE HANDS OF THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSEE IN RESPECTIVE YEARS. ACCORDINGLY, WE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY FROM THE RECORDS FOR THE RESPECTIVE YEARS AND INCLUDE THE ADDITIONAL INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF SUCH ADMITTED CLANDESTINE REMOVAL OF MATERIAL WITHOUT PAYMENT OF EXCISE DUTY, BY THE ASSESSEE EITHER BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION OR BEFORE THE EXCISE AUTHORITIES, IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE HEARD BUNCH OF APPEALS AND IN SOME YEARS, THERE IS NO ADMISSION OF CLANDESTINE REMOVAL OF MATERIAL WITHOUT PAYMENT OF EXCISE DUTY AND IN THOSE YEARS IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY E VIDENCE AND / OR ANY INVESTIGATION OR INQUIRY IN THOSE YEARS IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY E VIDENCE AND / OR ANY INVESTIGATION OR INQUIRY MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND WHERE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS FAILED TO COLLECT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE, BY WAY OF EXTRAPOLATION OF SALES FOR 300 DAYS ON AC COUNT OF ANY EVIDENCE FOUND IN ANY PRECEDING OR SUCCEEDING YEARS. FURTHER, NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE, WHERE NO PETITION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION IN ANY OF THE RESPECTIVE YEARS OR BEFORE THE EXCISE AUTHORITIES. 89. SINCE WE HAVE DELETED THE ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE ON BOTH ACCOUNTS I.E. ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF ERRATIC CONSUMPTION OF ELECTRICITY AND ADDITION PROPOSED ON THE BASIS OF EVIDENCE FOUND FOR THE PART OF THE YEAR OF CLAN DESTINE REMOVAL OF MATERIAL WITHOUT PAYMENT OF EXCISE DUTY, NEXT ADDITION MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE I.E. ALLEGED INVESTMENT IN THE PURCHASES FOR EFFECTING SUCH SALES WHICH GOODS HAVE BEEN CLANDESTINELY REMOVED, IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. ACCORDINGLY, WE HOLD THAT NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED INVESTMENT IN PURCHASES UNDER SECTION 69C OF THE ACT. 1 2 . THEREAFTER, CORRIGENDUM ORDER WAS PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL SUBSTITUTING PARA 88 OF THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 17.02.2016 AND IT WAS HELD AS UNDER: - 3. ON PERUSAL OF THE RECORD, WE FIND THAT BY AN ERROR, THE FINDINGS OF THE TRIBUNAL IN PARA 88 WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO FROM LINE 17 TO 22, NEEDS CORRECTION TO THE EXTENT THAT THE ADDITIONAL INCOME TO BE ADDED IN TH E HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE IS EQUIVALENT TO PROFITS ON SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION @ 4% OR ACTUAL GP RATE DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICHEVER WAS HIGHER. IN VIEW THEREOF, WE PASS THIS CORRIGENDUM ITA NO . 2071 / PN /201 4 ITA NO. 2023 /PN/201 4 ITA NO.2024/PN/2014 M/S. RUTUJA ISPAT PVT. LTD. & ANR 7 ORDER AND THE PARA 88 I.E. FROM LINE 17 TO 22 WOULD NOW BE SUBSTITUTE D BY FOLLOWING PARA. 88. ADMITTEDLY, THE ASSESSEE HAD OFFERED ADDITIONAL INCOME ON THE SAID CLANDESTINE REMOVAL OF MATERIAL WITHOUT PAYMENT OF EXCISE DUTY, WHICH IS TO BE ADDED AS INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTA TIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT IN CASE THE SAID ADDITIONAL INCOME HAS NOT BEEN ADDED WHILE COMPUTING THE INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE RESPECTIVE YEARS, THE SAME MAY BE DIRECTED TO BE ADDED IN THE HANDS OF THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSEE IN RESPECTIVE YEARS. ACCORDINGLY, WE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY FROM THE RECORDS FOR THE RESPECTIVE YEARS AND INCLUDE THE ADDITIONAL INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF SUCH ADMITTED CLANDESTINE REMOVAL OF MATERIAL WITHOUT PAYMENT OF EXCISE DUTY, BY THE ASSE SSEE EITHER BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION OR BEFORE THE EXCISE AUTHORITIES, IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, WE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY FROM THE RECORDS FOR THE RESPECTIVE YEARS AND INCLUDE IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE, THE ADDITIO NAL INCOME @ 4% OR ACTUAL G.P. RATE DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THAT YEAR, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER, ON VALUE OF SUCH ADMITTED CLANDESTINE REMOVAL OF MATERIAL WITHOUT PAYMENT OF EXCISE DUTY, BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE EXCISE AUTHORITIES. THUS, THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO FILE THE REQUISITE DETAILS OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE EXCISE AUTHORITIES, BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN ORDER TO COMPUTE THE ADDITIONAL INCOME IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE IN THE RESPECTIVE YEARS. 1 3 . FURTHER, THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CAS E WITH LEAD ORDER IN ITA NOS.276 & 277/PN/2012 , RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006 - 07 & 2007 - 08, VIDE ORDER DATED 12.08.2015 HAD DELETED THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF EXCESS PRODUCTION FOLLOWING THE CONSUMPTION OF ELECTRICITY AS PER US STANDARDS AS NOT ME RITED. 14. THE ISSUE ARISING BEFORE US IDENTICAL TO THE ISSUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN SHREE OM ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD. VS. ADDL. CIT (SUPRA) AND IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE . FURTHER, DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, NEITHER INVESTIGATION BY THE DGCEI NOR ANY SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION HAS BEEN DETECTED AND ADMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT MOVED ANY PETITION BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION OR ANY OTHER EXCISE AUTHORITIES. IN THE TOTALITY OF THE ABOVE SAID FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE COLLECTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF ALLEGED REMOVAL OF GOODS WITHOUT PAYMENT OF EXCISE DUTY, MERELY ON THE BASIS OF ESTIMATION OF ALLEGED SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION IN EARLIER YEARS , THERE IS NO MERIT IN MAKING ANY ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE. FURTHER, ITA NO . 2071 / PN /201 4 ITA NO. 2023 /PN/201 4 ITA NO.2024/PN/2014 M/S. RUTUJA ISPAT PVT. LTD. & ANR 8 THE TRIBUNAL IN SERIES OF CASES WITH LEAD ORDER IN SHREE OM ROLLING MILLS PVT. LTD. VS. ADDL. CIT (SUPRA) IN ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006 - 07 AND 2007 - 08 VIDE ORDER DATED 15.07.2015 AND IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE (SUPRA) HAS DELETED THE AD DITION MADE IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED SUPPRESSION OF PRODUCTION. IN THE TOTALITY OF THE ABOVE SAID FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE DELETE ADDITION MADE IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE BY THE CIT(A) TO THE EXTENT OF 4% OF THE SAID ALLEGED PRODUCT ION. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST CONFIRMING THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSION OF PRODUCTION BY APPLYING GP RATE OF 4% ON THE ALLEGED PRODUCTION OF SALE ARE ALLOWED. FURTHER, THE GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE RE VENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN QUANTIFYING THE SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION @ 4% AND DELETING THE ADDITION OF WORKING CAPITAL IS DISMISSED. 15. THE REVENUE HAS ALSO RAISED AN ISSUE AS TO WHETHER ANY FURTHER EXPENSES ON ACCOUNT OF MANUFACTURING AND ADMINI STRATION ARE TO BE ALLOWED AGAINST UNACCOUNTED PRODUCTION WORKED OUT IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE. THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN THIS REGARD AS NO ADDITION ON ESTIMATE BASIS IS UPHELD IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE . THE GROUND O F APPEAL NO.2 RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS THUS, REJECTED. I N VIEW THEREOF, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED AND THE APPEAL OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ITA NO.2024/PN/2014 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11 1 6 . IN THE CASE OF M/S. GAJLAXMI STEEL (JALNA) PVT. LTD., NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION WAS MOVED FOR ADJOURNMENT. WE PROCEED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL EX PARTE THE ASSESSEE AND AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE AS THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRES ENT APPEAL IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE ORDERS OF TRIBUNAL. ITA NO . 2071 / PN /201 4 ITA NO. 2023 /PN/201 4 ITA NO.2024/PN/2014 M/S. RUTUJA ISPAT PVT. LTD. & ANR 9 1 7 . THE ISSUE S RAISED IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE SIMILAR TO THE ISSUE S IN ITA NO.2023/PN/2014 AND FOLLOWING THE SAME PARITY OF REASONING, GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN QUANTIFYING THE SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION @ 4% , DELETING THE ADDITION OF WORKING CAPITAL AND EXPENSES ON ACCOUNT OF MANUFACTURING AND ADMINISTRATION ARE DISMISSED . 1 8 . IN THE RESULT, APPEA L OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED AND APPEAL S OF REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 30 TH DAY OF NOVEM BER , 201 6 . SD/ - SD/ - ( ANIL CHATURVEDI ) ( SUSHMA CHOWLA ) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ; / PUNE ; D ATED : 30 TH NOVEM BER , 201 6 . GCVSR / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT ; 2. / THE RESPONDENT; 3. ( ) / THE C I T (A), AURANGABAD ; 4. / THE C I T , AURANGABAD ; 5. , , / DR A , ITAT, PUNE; 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER , // TRUE COPY // / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE