DCIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata V. M/s. Shiva Wheels (P) Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 2087/KOL/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4484 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 year(s) 10 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 25-08-2016
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 21-11-2008
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DAVID Z CHAWNGTHU
• Assessee Lawyers: MIHIR BANDYOPADHYAY
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 143(3); 133A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH A KOL KATA [BEFORE HONBLE SHRI N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM & DR.ARJUN LAL SAINI, AM ] ITA NO.2087/KOL/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10, -VERSUS- M/S. SHIVA WHEELS (P) LTD. KOLKATA KOLKATA [PAN: AAYFS7140R] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) C.O.NO.35/KOL/2009 (A/O ITA NO.2087/KOL/2008) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 M/S. SHIVA WHEELS (P) LTD. -VERSUS- D.C.I.T., CIRC LE-10, KOLKATA KOLKATA [PAN: AAYFS7140R] (CROSS OBJECTOR) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE DEPARTMENT : SHRI DAVID ZCHAWNGTHU, ADDL.CI T FOR THE ASSESSEE : SHRI MIHIR BANDYOPADHYAY, A.R. DATE OF HEA RING : 25.08.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.09.2016. ORDER PER DR.ARJUN LAL SAINI, AM THE CAPTIONED APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE PERTAINING TO A.Y.2005-06, IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INC OME TAX (A)-XII, KOLKATA IN APPEAL NO.687/CIT(A)-XII/07-08, DATED 13.08.2008, W HICH IN TURN ARISES OUT OF AN ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 143( 3) OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT, THE ACT) DATED 31.12.2007. 2. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS STATED IN BRIEF. THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME SHOWING THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS.20,75,852/-. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT AND THE AO COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT BY MAKING VARIOUS ADDITIONS ON DATED 31/12/2007. THE ASSESSEE DEALS IN TWO WHEELERS. IN THIS ITA NO.2 087/KOL/2008 M/S. SHIVA WHEELS PVT.LTD. A..Y.2005-06 2 CASE A SURVEY U/S 133A OF THE ACT WAS CONDUCTED ON 23.03.2005. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOT O NLY USED THE REGULAR DOCUMENTS BUT THE DOCUMENTS WHICH WERE RECOVERED BY THE INCOME TA X DEPARTMENT, DURING SURVEY PROCEEDINGS WERE ALSO UTILIZED BY THE AO. THE LD. A O BASED ON THE SURVEY DOCUMENTS MADE THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS: I. ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN CLOSING STOCK TO TWO WHEELERS, II. ADDITION BASED ON TAX AUDIT REPORT, III. ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF DISCOUNT PAYABLE AT RS.3,10, 100/-, IV. ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF REGISTRATION COST AT RS.19,9 7,000/-, V. ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF INSURANCE REALIZATION AT RS .1,19,767/- VI. ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST AT RS.1,54,341/-. AGGRIEVED ,FROM THE ORDER OF THE LD ASSESSING OFFIC ER, THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD CIT(A), WHO AFTER GOING THROUGH THE E VIDENCES SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE AO, DELETED THESE ALL ADDITIONS. THE ASSESSE E DID NOT FURNISH ANY ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE BEFORE THE LD CIT(A) , THEREFORE THE LD CI T(A) DID NOT SEND ANY REMAND REPORT TO AO.HENCE, THESE ABOVE CITED ADDITIONS WER E SUBSEQUENTLY DELETED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND THEREFORE, NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AND HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- 1.THE LD. CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT DIFFERE NCE IN THE VALUE OF CLOSING STOCK WAS DUE TO DIFFERENCE IN THE VALUE OF CLOSING STOCK OF TWO WHEELERS PER UNIT SHOWN AT RS.33,083/- WHEREAS PURCHASE PRICE AND OPENING STOC K PER UNIT WERE ACTUALLY @ RS.65,297/- AND RS.50,839/- RESPECTIVELY. 2. THE . LD. CIT(A) WHILE DELETING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSION OF VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK DISCUSSED ONLY THE MISTAKE AS FOUND O UT IN QUANTITATIVE DETAIL AS PER CLAUSE-28( A) OF THE TAX AUDIT REPORT WITH REF. TO SCHEDULE-15 OF THE ANNUAL AUDIT REPORT BUT FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE VALUE OF SALE R ETURN OF 42 NO. OF VEHICLES WHICH COULD NOT BE SUBSTANTIATED BY THE ASSESSEE THOUGH SPECIFI CALLY ASKED FOR. 3. THE LD.CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE/ADDITION OF RS.3,10,100/- UNDER THE HEAD DISCOUNT PAYABLE FOR WANT OF NECESSA RY EVIDENCE/DETAIL ASKED BUT NOT FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. THE LD.CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE/ADDITION OF RS.19,97,000/- UNDER THE HEAD REGISTRATION COST FOR WHICH WAS ADDED FOR WANT OF NECESSARY EVIDENCE/DETAIL ASKED BUT NOT FURNISHED B Y THE ASSESSEE. 5. THE LD.CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE/ADDITION OF RS.L,19,767/- UNDER THE HEAD INSURANCE REALIZATION FOR WHICH WAS ADDED FOR WANT OF NECESSARY EVIDENCE/DETAIL ASKED BUT NOT FURNISHED BY THE ASSE SSEE. ITA NO.2 087/KOL/2008 M/S. SHIVA WHEELS PVT.LTD. A..Y.2005-06 3 6. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE, LD.CIT(A) WAS CORRECT IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF INTEREST OF RS.1,54,341/- ON INVESTMENT OF RS.14,03, 107/- FOR PERSONAL HOUSE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION OUT OF COMPANY ACCOUNT WITH THE FINDING THAT THE A.O. HAS MENTIONED NO SPECIFIC FINDING THAT THE INV ESTMENT WAS MADE OUT OF INTEREST- BEARING LOAN WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE HAS DEBITED INTER EST OF RS.10,99,737/- TO THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. 7. THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN ACCEPTING FRESH EVIDENCE IN VIOLATION OF RULE-46A IN DECIDING MAJOR OF THE ISSUES. 3. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (DR) FOR THE REVENUE HAS RELIED ON THE STAND TAKEN BY THE AO, WHICH IS REPRODUCED BELOW :- AS NO EXPLANATION TO VARIOUS EXPENSES HAVE BEEN SU BMITTED AS ASKED VIDE ORDER SHEET DATED 14.12.2007, HENCE, AS PER EVIDENCE FOUND/EXTR ACTED IN COURSE OF SURVEY IT IS BEING CONSIDERED AND ALLOWED AS PER ENTRIES IN THE EXTRAC TED DOCUMENT TAKEN IN COURSE OF HEARING AND THE BALANCE IS BEING ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME AS UNDER BEING THE CLOSING BALANCE :- DISCOUNT PAYABLE RS. 3,10,1001- PAGE 13 OF VOL.L REGISTRATION COST RS.19,97,0001- PAGE 6 OF VOL.L INSURANCE REALISATION RS. 1,19,767/- P AGE 1 OF VOL.L DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST - AS PER EXTRACTED DETAIL IT IS FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS INVESTED 14,03,107/- IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF HOU SE WHICH INCLUDE RS.13,58,107/- FOR THE YEAR AND RS.45,000/- FOR THE EARLIER YEAR BROUG HT FORWARDED. IN COURSE OF STATEMENT AT THE TIME OF SURVEY THE ASSESSEE STATED VIDE REPL Y TO QUESTION NO.11 THAT OUR RESIDENTIAL HOUSE IS PRESENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION AT A-1/23, RA MGARH, P.O. NAKTALA, KOLKATA - 47 AND THE EXPENSES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION IS MADE FROM THE COMPANY ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE ALSO CONFIRMED THIS FACT IN COURSE OF HEARING VIDE ORDER SHEET DATED 14.12.2007. THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO ASKED AS TO WHY INTEREST ON PRO R ATA BASIS ON THIS AMOUNT SHOULD NOT BE DISALLOWED CONSIDERING THAT THIS AMOUNT HAS NOT BEE N USED FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS. ON PRO RATA BASIS THE INTEREST ON RS.1,54,341/- WOR KS OUT ON RS.14,03,107/- HENCE THIS AMOUNT OF RS.1,54,341/- IS BEING DISALLOWED OUT OF INTEREST OF RS.10,09,737/- DEBITED TO P&L A/C. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS OBSERVED THAT QUANTITATIVE DE TAILS AS SUBMITTED IN THE TAX AUDIT REPORT VIDE CLAUSE 28(A) DOES NOT TALLY WITH THE DE TAILS OF QUANTITIY GIVEN IN SCHEDULE 15 OF THE AUDITED ACCOUNTS. REGARDING DIFFERENCE IN THE CLOSING STOCK OF TWO WH EELERS THE AR FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT IN CLAUSE 28(A) OF TAX AUDIT REP ORT THE FIGURES FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 HAVE BEEN TYPED INSTEAD OF FIGURES OF ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. AGAINST THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE FOR SUCH ANOMALLY THE APPELLA NT EXPLAINED THE MATTER ALONG ITA NO.2 087/KOL/2008 M/S. SHIVA WHEELS PVT.LTD. A..Y.2005-06 4 WITH THE CERTIFICATE FROM THE AUDITOR RECTIFYING TH E MISTAKE (ENCLO : I) .THE ADDITIONS ARE MADE ON THE BASIS OF AUDIT REPORT WHICH WAS ERR ONEOUSLY SUBMITTED EARLIER GIVING IDENTICAL FIGURES FOR THE ASSESSSMENT YEAR 2004-05. APPARENTLY IT IS A GLARING AND APPARENT AND NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE FOR ALLEGED U NDER VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK ON THE BASIS OF CLOSING STOCK FIGURES FOR ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2004-05. THERE IS NO DISCREPANCY IN THE VALUE OF CLOSING STO CK IF CORRECT AUDIT REPORT IS LOOKED INTO. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO DISC REPANCY IN THE STOCK WHEN THE SURVEY WAS MADE. ASSESSEE MAINTAINS DAY-TO -DAY STOCK REGI STER, WHICH WAS VERIFIED BY THE SURVEY PARTY AND THEY FOUND NO DEFECT THEREIN. THAT BEING SO, THIS ADDITION CAN NOT BE SUSTAINED. THE ENCLOSED CHART WILL SHOW THE MISTAKE OF THE A.O CLEARLY (ENCLO:II) HENCE THE LD. CIT(A) WAS RIGHT IN DELETING THE ADDI TION. FOR SALES OUT OF BOOKS -RS. 28,86,323/- THE AR SUB MITTED THAT IN SCHEDULE 15 OF COMPANY AUDIT REPORT THE QUANTITATIVE FIGURE OF SAL ES WAS SHOWN AT 4155 UNITS. THE AUDITOR COMMITTED A MISTAKE IN THIS REPORT BY NOT T AKING INTO ACCOUNT 42 NOS. OF SALES RETURN. AGAINST THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE, THE AUDITOR ACCEPTED THE MISTAKE AND .SUBMITTED THE STATEMENT RECTIFYING THE MISTAKE. TH E ASSESSEE ALSO EXPLAINED THE MISTAKE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT VERIFYING TH E C.D OF ACCOUNT BOOKS SEIZED AND HARD COPY WHERE SALES RETURNS HAVE ALREADY BEEN RECORDED AND LYING WITH HIM AND EVEN WITHOUT GIVING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE A PPELLANT THE ADDITION OF RS. 28,86,324.00 WAS MADE MERELY ON SURMISE. PURCHASE A ND SALES RETURN IS VERY COMMON IN THIS LINE OF BUSINESS. SALES RETURN IS ON LY AT 10% OF SALES. QUANTITATIVE TALLY OF OPENING STOCK, PURCHASES SALES & CLOSING S TOCK ARE SHOWN IN ENCLO:III. REGARDING COST OF REGISTRATION , THE AR FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED THAT THE CUSTO MERS PAY REGISTRATION COST FOR REGISTRATION OF VEHICLES. IF THERE IS ANY SURPLUS IT IS TRANSFERRED AS PROFIT. THE DETAILS OF REGISTRATION COST IS STATED BELOW WHICH HAVE BEEN FURNISHED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON 28.12. 2007. AMOUNT (RS.) OPENING BALANCE AS ON 01.04.2004 11,45,703.38 ( CR) ITA NO.2 087/KOL/2008 M/S. SHIVA WHEELS PVT.LTD. A..Y.2005-06 5 ADD: RECEIVED UP TO 23.03.2005 1,26,01,658.00 (RS. 1,25,85,4901 + 16,168/-) 1,37,47,361.38 (RECORDED IN CD LYING WITH DEPT) ADD: RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD 23.03.2005 TO 31.03.2005 4,67,040.00 1,42,14,401.38 LESS: PAID UP TO 22.03.2005 1,17,45,157.00 (RS. 1,17,33,393/- + 11,764/-) (RECORDED IN C.D LYING WITH DEPT.) LESS: PAID DURING THE YEAR 23.03.2005 TO 31.03.2005 2,74,474.00 21,94,770.38 LESS: TRANSFER TO P&L A/C INCOME FROM REGISTRATION (SCH-L1) (RECORDED IN C.D LYING WITH DEPT.) 13,59,817.38 BALANCE AS ON 31.03.2005 OF BALANCE SHEET (SHOWN IN SCH.8) 8,34,953.00 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 THE TOTAL REGISTRAT ION COST RECEIVED FROM CUSTOMERS WAS OPENING BALANCE RS. 85,550.00 PLUS RECEIVED DUR ING THE YEAR RS. 69,44,390.00 I.E. RS. 70,29,940.00, OUT OF WHICH RS. 58,84,236.00 HAS BEEN PAID FOR RS. 58,84,236 AND BALANCE REMAINS AT RS 11,45,704.00. THE PROFIT EARN ED DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR HAS NOT BEEN TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT AND IT REMAINS WITH CLOSING BALANCE.THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD ESTIMATED RS. 4,26,328.00 AS PROFIT FOR THE ASSTT. YEAR 2004-05. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ESTIMATED THE INCOME WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IN C.D LYING WITH HIM AND HAS NOT CONSIDE RED THE ACCOUNTS IN C.D SEIZED BY THE DEPT. AND ESTIMATED THE INCOME WITHOUT ASSIG NING ANY REASON. REGARDING INSURANCE REALISATION THE AR SUBMITTED THAT THE APPELLANT RECEIVED INSURANCE PREMIUM FROM THE CUSTOMER FOR INSURANCE O F THEIR VEHICLES OUT OF WHICH INSURANCE PREMIUM IS PAID ON BEHALF OF CUSTOMERS.TH E APPELLANT SUBMITTED THE DETAILS ITA NO.2 087/KOL/2008 M/S. SHIVA WHEELS PVT.LTD. A..Y.2005-06 6 OF INSURANCE REALIZATION VIDE ITS LETTER DATED 20.1 2.2007 SUBMITTED ON 26.12.2007 AS FOLLOWS: INSURANCE COST REALIZED: AMOUNT (RS.) OPENING BALANCE (DR.) AS ON 01.04.2004 37, 042.00 ADD: INSURANCE COST PAID UP TO 23.03.2005 17,73 ,141.00 (1,27,313.00 + 16,45,828.00) (RECORDED IN C.D LYING WITH DEPT.) LESS: INSURANCE COST REALISED / RECEIVED UP TO 22.0 3.2005 18,69,665.00 (7546.00 + 18,62,119.00) (RECORDED IN C.D LYING WITH DEPT.) CLOSING BALANCE AS ON 22.03.2005 59,482.0 0 (CR.) THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DISALLOWED THE RS. 1,19,7 67.00 ON ACCOUNT OF INSURANCE PAID ONLY WHICH IS CONCEPTUALLY WRONG. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE SUBMIS SION AND ACCOUNTS IN C.D AS ALL THE ENTRIES UPTO 22.03.2005 HAVE BEEN RECORDED IN A CCOUNTS IN C D SEIZED. THE ASSESSING, OFFICER HAS MISCONCEPTED AND HE HAS TAKE N ONLY INSURANCE PAID. HENCE THE LD. CIT(A) WAS CORRECT IN DELETING THE ADDITION. ( KINDLY VIDE ENCLOSURE-II). REGARDING DISCOUNT PAYABLE THE LD AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DISALLOWED RS. 3,10,100.00, WHICH CONSTITUTES OF CA RRIED FORWARD PAYABLE BALANCE OF ASSTT. YEAR 2004 - 05 OUT OF THE SAID AMOUNT RS. 2, 37,500.00 HAS BEEN DISALLOWED AND ASSESSED AS INCOME FOR THE ASTT. YEAR 2004-05 WHICH IS DISPUTED AND UNDER APPEAL AS PER CLOSING BALANCE IN BALANCE SHEET AS AT 31.03.20 05 RS. 2,37,500.00 IS THE BROUGHT FORWARD BALANCE OF THE ASTT. YEAR 2004-05 EMBEDDED WITH THE CLOSING BALANCE FOR THE ASSTT. YEAR 2005- 06. FURTHER IT MAY BE NOTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT THE FIGURES AS ON 22.03.2005 FOR VARIO US HEADS EXCEPTING DISCOUNT PAYABLE. IN RESPECT OF DISCOUNT PAYABLE, REGISTRATION COST, INSURANCE REALIZATION IT APPEARS THAT THE A.O. HAS ADOPTED THE BASIS OF THE SURVEY REPORT CONDUCTED BEFORE THE CLOSING OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR. THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND AUDITED BA LANCE SHEET HAD BEEN PRODUCED AND NO DISCREPANCY THEREIN COULD BE FOUND BY THE AS SESSING OFFICER AND THERE IS NO ITA NO.2 087/KOL/2008 M/S. SHIVA WHEELS PVT.LTD. A..Y.2005-06 7 ALLEGATION THAT THE AMOUNTS WHICH HAD BEEN REFLECTE D IN THE SURVEY REPORT HAD NOT BEEN TALLIED WITH THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THUS THE LD. CI T(A) WAS RIGHT IN DELETING THE ADDITION. REGARDING INTEREST THE LD AR SUBMITTED THAT IN DISALLOWING INTEREST T HE A.O DID NOT CONSIDER THE AMOUNT AVAILABLE TO THE COMPANY WHERE NO INTEREST IS PAYABLE. THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN INVESTED FORM MIXED ACCOUNT, WHICH INCLUDES THE SALES MADE BY THE APPELLANT WHICH DOES NOT BEAR INTEREST. THEREFORE, THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE A.O IS UNJUSTIFIED. IN RESPECT OF THE ADDITIONS OF DISCOUNT PAYABLE, RE GISTRATION COST AND INSURANCE REALIZATION, THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT ALL THESE A RE RECORDED IN THE CD AND THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT SEIZED AND IMPOUNDED BY THE DEPARTMENT A ND LD. CIT HAD GIVEN PROPER REASON FOR GIVING RELIEF. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT ALL THESE EXPENSES ARE REASONABLE AND THERE IS NOT MATERIAL BROUGHT INTO RECORD TO SHOW THAT TH E CLAIMS WERE UNJUSTIFIED. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE A.O HAD ADOPTED THE BALANCE IN C D BUT DID NOT COMPARE WITH THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT PRODUCED BEFORE HIM, WHICH WERE FU LLY SUPPORTED BY THE EVIDENCES. IN FACT, THE A.O HAS NOT POINTED OUT THAT ANY OF TH E EXPENDITURE ARE NOT SUPPORTED BY THE EVIDENCES. ONLY ON THE BASIS OF CD BALANCES NO- ADDITION CAN BE MADE WITHOUT REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT PRODUCED BEFORE HIM. THE LD. CIT(A) WAS, THEREFORE, JUSTIFIED IN ALLOWING THESE EXPENSES. HE HAD ALSO G IVEN FULL DETAILS OF THE SAME WHICH ARE FOUND IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT PRODUCED BEFORE T HE A.O AS WELL AS LD. CIT(A). THEREFORE, THERE IS NO REASON FOR TAKING OBJECTION TO SUCH RELIEF. IN RESPECT OF INTEREST ALSO, ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) CANNOT BE ASSAILED IN ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE THAT INTEREST BEARING LOAN HAD BEEN INVESTED FOR CONSTRU CTION OF THE HOUSE PROPERTY. C.O.NO.35/KOL/2009 : REGARDING VIOLATION OF RULE 46A, THE LD AR FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS MADE FRESH ARGUMEN TS ONLY AND NO FRESH EVIDENCES WERE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE LD CIT(A), T HEREFORE, RULE 46A DOES NOT ATTRACT IN THIS CASE. ITA NO.2 087/KOL/2008 M/S. SHIVA WHEELS PVT.LTD. A..Y.2005-06 8 4.1 ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD DR FOR THE REVENUE HAS PRIMARILY REITERATED THE STAND TAKEN BY THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER, WHICH WE HAVE AL READY NOTED IN EARLIER PARA AND IS NOT BEING REPEATED FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY. 4.2. HAVING HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE NOTIC ED THAT THERE IS MERIT IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, AS THE PROPOSITIONS CO NVINCED BY THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE ARE SUPPORTED BY THE FACTS NARRATED BY HIM AND THE RECONCILIATION OF EACH FIGURE SUBMITTED BY HIM. WE HAVE CONVINCED WITH THE RECONCILIATION OF EACH ITEM SUBMITTED BY THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE A LSO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESEE DID NOT SUBMIT ANY FRESH EVIDENCE BEFORE THE LD CIT(A) BUT HE DID THE FRESH ARGUMENTS AND SUBMITTED RECONCILIATIONS WHICH WE HAVE NOTED IN OU R EARLIER PARA. WE HAVE HEARD ON EACH GROUND AND NOTED THE FINDINGS. HENCE, WE DO NO T FIND ANY REASON TO SAY THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD CIT(A) IS WRONG. THEREFORE W E DO NOT HESITATE TO CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 5. IN THE RESULT, CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE ON ALL GROUNDS ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 21.09.2016. SD/- SD/- [N.V.VASUDEVAN] [DR.ARJUN LAL SAINI] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE: 21.09.2016. R.G.(.P.S.) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . M/S. SHIVA WHEELS PVT. LTD., A-1/23, RAMGARH, P.O.N AKTALA, KOLKATA-47. 2 D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10, KOLKATA. 3 . CIT(A)-XII, KOLKATA 4. CIT-IV, KOLKATA. 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, DEPUTY /ASST. REGISTRAR , ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES ITA NO.2 087/KOL/2008 M/S. SHIVA WHEELS PVT.LTD. A..Y.2005-06 9