Inland World Logistics Pvt. Ltd.(Formerly M/s Inland road Transport Pvt.Ltd.), Kolkata V. A.C.I.T CC - IV,kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 2320/KOL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9186 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-03-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 24-01-2017
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 28-08-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B C JAIN FCA MD GHAYAS
• Assessee Lawyers: T VARKEY JUDIC IA L M EMBER
• Keywords: Depreciation; Principle of natural justice; Source of fund; Corroborative evidences; Capital expenditure
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 37(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH B KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI ABY.T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2320 & 2364 / KOL / 2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2011-12 INLAND WORLD LOGISTICS PVT. LTD., P-221/2 STRAND BANK ROAD, KOLKATA-001 [ PAN NO.AAACI 5607 C ] ACIT,CC-IV, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, POORVA, 110 SHANTI PALLY,KOLKATA-107 V/S . V/S . ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-IV, AYKAR BHAWAN PURVA 3 RD , FLOOR, 110, SHANTI PALLY, KOLKATA-107 M/S INLAND WORLD LOGISTIC PVT. LTD.P-221/2, STRAND BANK ROAD, KOLKATA-001 /APPELLANT .. / RESPONDENT /BY ASSESSEE SHRI B.C. JAIN, FCA /BY RESPONDENT MD. GHAYAS UDDIN, JCIT-SR-DR /DATE OF HEARING 24-01-2017 ! /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 23-03-2017 / O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS REVENUE ARE IN CROSS-APPEA LS DIRECTED AGAINST THE COMMON ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APP EALS), CENTRAL I, KOLKATA DATED 15.07.2013. ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY ACIT, CC-IV, KOLKATA U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 19.04.2013 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. SHRI B.C. JAIN, LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEA RED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE AND MD. GHAYAS UDDIN, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATI VE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF REVENUE. ITA NO.2320 & 2364/KOL/2013 A.Y. 2011-12 INLAND WORLD LOGISTICS PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT, CC-IV , KOL. PAGE 2 2. BOTH THE APPEALS ARE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEIN G DISPOSED OF BY WAY OF CONSOLIDATE ORDER. FIRST WE TAKE UP ASSESSEES APPEAL IN ITA NO.2320/K OL/2013 . 3. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT ASSESSEE, A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY, ENGAGED IN TRANSPORTATION BUSINESS HAS FILED ITS RE TURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF 9,79,92,809/-. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE CASE WAS SELECTED UNDER SCRUTINY CASS MODULE AND ACCORDINGLY ISSUED NOTICE U/S. 143(2) / 142(1) OF THE ACT UPON THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAME D U/S. 143(3) AT A TOTAL INCOME OF 12,33,53,380/- AFTER MAKING CERTAIN ADDITIONS / DIS ALLOWANCES WHICH ARE DISCUSSED HERE IN BELOW:- 4. FIRST ISSUE RAISED BY ASSESSEE IN GROUND NO. 1 & 2 IS THAT LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER BY SUSTAINING THE DISALLOWANCE OF 1,25,30,287/- TOWARDS REPAIR EXPENSE ON THE RENTED PREMISES. THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE A LSO SUBMITTED TO TREAT THE SAID REPAIR EXPENSE AS CAPITAL IN NATURE AND PRAYED FOR THE ALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION THEREON. THE ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED AN EXPENSE OF 1,25,30,288/- ON REPAIR & MAINTENANCE FOR ITS GO-DOWN TAKEN ON LEASE. THE DET AILS OF SUCH EXPENSES ARE REPRODUCED BELOW:- SL. NO. GODOWN AT AMOUNT W/OFF DURING THE YEAR INR NAME OF LANDLORD MONTHLY RENT INR 1 ANKURHATI (BOMBAY ROAD) WB 255990 CHANDU SOMANI 75000 2 SALAP (BOMBAY ROAD) WB 3474066 SOMANI SERVICES P. LTD. 25000 3 M.D. ROAD, KOLKATA 6496321 INLAND COURIERS P. LTD 10000 TOTAL 12530287 THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED SUCH EXPENDITURE IN ENTIRE TY IN THE FORM OF DEPRECIATION IN TAX AUDIT REPORT. HOWEVER, THE ASSE SSEE CLAIMED THAT THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED REPRESENTING THE CURRENT REPAI RS AND THEREFORE ALLOWABLE U/S.30(A)(II) AND SEC. 37(1) OF THE ACT. ON QUESTIO N BY THE AO ABOUT THE DETAILS OF CURRENT REPAIRS AND SOURCE OF FUND FOR SUCH HUGE EXPENDITURE THE ASSESSEE ITA NO.2320 & 2364/KOL/2013 A.Y. 2011-12 INLAND WORLD LOGISTICS PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT, CC-IV , KOL. PAGE 3 FAILED TO FURNISH THE SUPPORTING EVIDENCE. THEREFOR E, THE AO DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE AND ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF ASSESSEE. 5. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE L D. CIT(A) WHO HAS CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF AO BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- 4. IN GROUND NO 2, IT HAS BEEN CONTENDED THAT THE A O WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN NOT ALLOWING SUM OF RS.1,25,30,287/- AS EXPENDITURE ON CURRENT REPAIRS WHICH WAS INADVERTENTLY REFLECTED AS INVESTMENT IN TENANTED P ROPERTY IN THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS. IT WAS EXPLAINED BEFORE THE AO THAT THE SAID SUM WAS CLAIMED AS DEPRECIATION BUT THE SAME SHOULD BE ALLOWED AS EXPE NDITURE. THE ISSUE IS COVERED BY MY ORDER DATED THE 18 TH JULY, 2012 IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 IN APPEAL NO. 241/CIT(A ) C-I/CCIV/KOL/11- 12. IT WAS HELD IN PARA 13 OF THE SAID APPELLATE OR DER THAT SIMILAR SUM WAS NEITHER ALLOWABLE AS EXPENDITURE NOR AS DEPRECIATIO N. FOLLOWING THE DECISION, GROUND NO. 2 IS DISMISSED. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THIS ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) ASSESSE E CAME IN SECOND APPEAL BEFORE US. 6. THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US SUBMITTED THAT THE INSTANT ISSUE HAS ALREADY BEEN COVERED IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE BY THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.1179/KOL/2012 FOR THE AY 2004-05 VIDE ORDER DATED 29.4.2016 WHEREIN IT WAS DIRECTED TO TREAT THE CURR ENT REPAIR EXPENDITURE AS CAPITAL IN NATURE AND ACCORDINGLY ALLOW THE DEPRECI ATION THEREON. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESS EE FAILED TO FURNISH THE NECESSARY DETAILS AND VEHEMENTLY RELIED ON THE ORDE R OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ISSUE IN THE INS TANT CASE RELATES TO THE DISALLOWANCES MADE BY THE AO FOR THE CURRENT REPAIR EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE EXPENSES WERE DISALLOWED BY THE AO ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO FURNISH THE NECESSARY DETAILS IN SUPPORT OF AFORESAID REPAIR EXPENSES. THE ACTION OF THE AO WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CON FIRMED BY THE LD CIT(A). THE LD AR BEFORE US ALTERNATIVELY SUBMITTED THAT TH E SAID EXPENSES CAN BE TREATED AS CAPITAL IN NATURE AND THE DEPRECIATION T HEREON CAN BE ALLOWED. THE LD AR IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION HAS ALSO SUBMITT ED THAT THE ISSUE IS ALREADY ITA NO.2320 & 2364/KOL/2013 A.Y. 2011-12 INLAND WORLD LOGISTICS PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT, CC-IV , KOL. PAGE 4 COVERED BY THE ORDER OF HONBLE ITAT IN THE ASSESSE ES OWN CASE (SUPRA). HOWEVER, ON PERUSAL OF THE AFORESAID ITAT ORDER WE FIND THAT THERE WAS NO DISPUTE ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE EXPENDITURE BU T IN THE INSTANT CASE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO ESTABLISH THE GENUINENESS OF THE EXPENDITURE. THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF THE HONBLE ITAT IS DISTINGUISHABLE AS THE FACTS OF BOTH THE CASES ARE DIFFERENT. THE QUESTION TO TREAT THE CURRENT R EPAIR AS CAPITAL EXPENDITURE ARISES ONLY WHEN THE ASSESSEE ESTABLISHES THE GENUI NENESS OF THE EXPENSES. AS IN THE CASE BEFORE US THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO FUR NISH THE NECESSARY DETAILS IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES, THEREFORE THE PLEA FOR DEPRECIATION CANNOT BE ENTERTAINED. HOWEVER, NOW TH E LD AR HAS SUBMITTED THE LIST OF EXPENSES OF THE CURRENT REPAIR EXPENS ES ALONG WITH THE BANK STATEMENT FOR CONSIDERATION. IN THE AFORESAID FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT FIRST THE GENUINENESS OF THE EXPENSES SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED. FOR THAT PURPOSE AND IN THE INTEREST O F NATURAL JUSTICE, WE ARE INCLINED TO RESTORE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AS PER LAW. ONCE THE GENUINENESS OF THE EXPENSES GETS ESTABLISH ED, THEN THE SAME CAN BE TREATED AS CAPITAL IN NATURE AND THE DEPRECIATIO N THEREON CAN BE ALLOWED. THUS THE GROUND FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FO R STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. NEXT ISSUE RAISED BY ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL IS THAT LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF AO BY SUSTAINING THE DISALL OWANCE OF 1.50 LAKH, 50,000/- AND 1 LAKH ON ACCOUNT OF TELEPHONE EXPENSE, BUSINESS PROMOTION EXPENSE AND MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES RESPEC TIVELY. 9. THE ASSESSEE, IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION HA S CLAIMED TELEPHONE EXPENSE, MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSE AND BUSINESS PROMOTI ON EXPENSE. ON QUESTION BY THE AO ABOUT THE DETAILS OF SUCH EXPENS ES TO ESTABLISH WHETHER THESE WERE INCURRED IN CONNECTION WITH BUSINESS. TH E ASSESSEE FAILED TO GIVE SATISFACTORY REPLY TO AO. THEREFORE, THE AO DISALLO WED THE EXPENSES ON ESTIMATED BASIS. 10. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A) WHO AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSION OF ASSESSEE CONFIRMED TH E ORDER OF AO BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- ITA NO.2320 & 2364/KOL/2013 A.Y. 2011-12 INLAND WORLD LOGISTICS PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT, CC-IV , KOL. PAGE 5 .. I DO NOT FIND MERIT IN THE SUBMISSIONS MADE ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT WHEN ALL RELEVANT DETAILS WERE NOT PRODUCED AT THE ASSESSMENT STAGE. THE DISALLOWANCES MADE BY THE AO ARE NEITHER EXCESSIVE NOR UNREASONABLE. THE DISALLOWANCES ARE CONFIRMED. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THIS ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) ASSESSE E CAME IN SECOND APPEAL BEFORE US. 11. BEFORE US LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE NECESSA RY DETAILS WERE NOT FURNISHED BEFORE AUTHORITIES BELOW DUE TO MASSIVE F IRE BROKE OUT IN THE OFFICE OF ASSESSEE. LD. AR ALSO SUBMITTED THAT IN THE EARL IER YEARS, NO DISALLOWANCE IN THE ABOVE EXPENSES WAS MADE BY THE AUTHORITIES B ELOW. IN SUPPORT OF ASSESSEES CLAIM LD. AR SUBMITTED A CHART OF THE EX PENSES WHICH REPRODUCED BELOW AS UNDER:- A.Y TURNOVER TELEPHONE EXP. DISALLOWANCE TELEPHONE BUSINESS PROMOTION DISALLOWANCE BUSINESS PROMOTION MISC. EXP. DISALLOWANCE MISC. EXP. 09-10 35162.00 236.27 NIL 2.66 NIL 25 2.77 NIL 10-11 42284.22 190.67 NIL 13.57 NIL 1 83.53 NIL 11-12 49310.97 169.72 1.50 16.00 0.50 14 7.98 1.00 ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. 12. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ISSUE IN THE PRE SENT CASE RELATES TO THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ON ACCOU NT OF NON-PRODUCTION OF SUPPORTING EVIDENCE. THEREFORE, DISALLOWANCES WERE MADE ON AD HOC BASIS. IT IS THE DUTY OF THE ASSESSEE TO SUBMIT THE DOCUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF THE EXPENDITURE CLAIMED IN PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH DOCUMENTS, THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE EXPENSES CANNOT BE ESTABLISHED. THEREFORE THE DISALLOWANCES ARE WARRANTED. HOWEVER, BEFORE MA KING THE DISALLOWANCES IT SHOULD BE BASED ON SOME REASONABLE BASIS. TO FORM T HE REASONABLE BASIS, IT IS IMPERATIVE TO REFER THE HISTORICAL DATA OF THE A SSESSEE AND TO REFER THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. IF THE EXPENSES CLAIMED BY ASSESSEE IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION ARE EXCESSIVE IN COMPARISON TO EARLIE R YEARS AND ALSO DO NOT COMMENSURATE WITH THE TURNOVER OF THE ASSESSEE THEN DISALLOWANCES CAN BE ITA NO.2320 & 2364/KOL/2013 A.Y. 2011-12 INLAND WORLD LOGISTICS PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT, CC-IV , KOL. PAGE 6 MADE IN THE ABSENCE OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE AND ANY PLAUSIBLE REASONS FOR SUCH EXCESSIVE EXPENDITURE THEN THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AUTHO RITIES BELOW STAND ON SCIENTIFIC BASIS. HOWEVER, IN THE PRESENT CASE, WE FIND THAT THERE WAS NO EXCESS CLAIM OF EXPENDITURE MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN COMPARISON TO EARLIER YEARS VIS--VIS TO THE TURNOVER OF ASSESSEE. IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THERE WAS A MASSIVE FIRE BROKE OUT IN ASSESSEES OF FICE PREMISES AS CLAIMED BY ASSESSEE AND THAT MAY BE ONE OF THE REASONS FOR NON-PRODUCTION OF THE SUPPORTING EVIDENCE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. H OWEVER NONE OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE NOT COMMENTED TO THIS ASPECT . SINCE THERE IS NO FINDING OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ON THIS ASPECT WHE THER THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO GIVE SATISFACTORY REPLY DUE TO FIRE BREAK OUT IN TH E OFFICE OF ASSESSEE AND IF THAT IS NOT THE CASE THEN IT WAS THE DUTY OF ASSESSEE TO JUSTIFY ALL THE EXPENSES CLAIMED IN ITS PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. HOWEVER, WE ARE NOT INTERESTED IN SENDING BACK THE MATTER TO THE AO TO AVOID FURTHER LITIGATION. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE RESTRICT THE DISALLOWANCES TO THE EXTENT OF 50% FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, AS ALL THE VOUCHERS WERE NOT PRODUCED FOR VERIFICATION DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. AO I S DIRECTED ACCORDINGLY. THUS, THIS GROUND OF ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED. 13. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. COMING TO REVENUES APPEAL IN ITA NO.2364/KOL/2013 . 14. REVENUE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUND OF APPEAL:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, L D. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING AN ADDITION OF R.1,25,30,287/- IGNORING THE FACTS T HAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN ITS INABILITY TO PRODUCE THE SUPPORTING BILLS/VOUCH ERS TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM. 15. THE SOLITARY ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS THA T LD. CIT-A ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO FOR RS. 1,25,3 0,287/- ON ACCOUNT OF INVESTMENT IN TENANTED PROPERTY OUT OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME. THE ASSESSEE IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION HAS MADE THE INVESTMEN T IN THE TENANTED PROPERTIES FOR RS.1,25,30,287/-. ON QUESTION BY THE AO ABOUT THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE AMOUNT H AS BEEN SPENT FROM THE ITA NO.2320 & 2364/KOL/2013 A.Y. 2011-12 INLAND WORLD LOGISTICS PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT, CC-IV , KOL. PAGE 7 REGULAR SOURCE OF THE BUSINESS WHICH IS DULY RECORD ED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. HOWEVER, THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE NECESSA RY SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS WERE NOT AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE. THE REFORE THE AO TREATED THE SAME AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME AND ADDED TO THE TOT AL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 16. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE BEFORE LD. CIT(A) SUBMITTED THE EXPENDITUR E ON REPAIR & MAINTENANCE WAS REPRESENTING THE CURRENT REPAIRS AN D IT WAS DULY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND TAX AUDIT REPORT. T HE AO HAS FOUND NO DEFECT IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WHILE FRAMING ASSESSMENT PR OCEEDINGS AND LD. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSION OF ASSESSEE HAS DE LETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- I HAVE PERUSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND COPY OF THE TAX AUDIT REPORT PRODUCED IN COURSE OF THE APPELLANT PROCEEDINGS. I FIND THAT SUM OF RS.125.30 LAKHS IS REFLECTED IN SCHEDULE D FIXED ASSETS TO THE TAX AUDIT REPORT UNDER THE HEAD DEVELOPMENT OF TENANTED PROPERTY. THIS F ACT HAS ALSO BEEN ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE AO IN HIS ASSESSMENT ORDER WHET HER THE SUM OF RS.1,25,30,287/- WAS RELATED TO CURRENT REPAIRS OR INVESTMENT IN TENANTED PROPERTY, THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE SAME IS DULY RE FLECTED IN THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY; AND CONSEQUENTLY, THE SAME CANNOT BE REGARDED AS UNDISCLOSED. IN THIS FACTUAL BACKGROUND , IT IS TO E HELD THAT THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN TREATING THE SAID SUM AS UNDIS CLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ADDITION OF RS.1,25,30,287/- ON ACCOU NT OF INVESTMENT IN TENANTED PROPERTY IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. GROUND NO 1 IS ALLOWED. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THIS ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 17. LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US REITERATED TH E ARGUMENTS THAT WERE MADE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR VEHEMENTLY RELIED ON THE ORDER OF AO. 18. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE FACTS OF THE CAS E HAVE ALREADY BEEN ELABORATED IN THE FOREGOING PARAGRAPHS AND THERE IS NO DISPUTE ABOUT THE FACTS OF THE CASE. THEREFORE THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE NO T REPEATED FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY. AT THE OUTSET IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASS ESSEE HAS ADMITTED BEFORE ITA NO.2320 & 2364/KOL/2013 A.Y. 2011-12 INLAND WORLD LOGISTICS PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT, CC-IV , KOL. PAGE 8 THE AO THAT THE NECESSARY DETAILS WITH REGARD TO TH E INVESTMENT IN THE TENANTED PROPERTIES ARE NOT READILY AVAILABLE. HOW EVER, THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) SUBMITTED THAT IMPUGNED INVESTMENTS HAVE BEEN DISCLOSED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND NO DEFECT WAS POINTED OUT BY THE AO. THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) ALLOWED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. IT I S ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WERE DULY PRODUCED BEFORE THE AO AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT. AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTS IN TOTALITY , WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE AO FAILED TO BRING ANY DEFECT IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOU NTS AND ALL THE INVESTMENTS HAVE BEEN DULY DISCLOSED IN SUCH BOOKS. THUS, WE FI ND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) AND UPHOLD THE SAME. HENCE, THIS GROU ND OF REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 19. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE AND THAT OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 23/ 03/2017 SD/- SD/- (ABY. T. VARKEY) (WASEEM AHMED) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) KOLKATA, *DKP '#$- 23 / 03 /201 7 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. /ASSESSEE-INLAND WORLD LOGISTICS PVT. LTD., P-221/2 , STRAND BANK ROAD, KOL-01 2. /REVENUE-ACIT,C. C, AYKAR BHAWAN, PURVA 3 RD FL, 110 SHANTI PALLY,KOL-107 3.#,#-. / / CONCERNED CIT KOLKATA 4. /- / CIT (A) KOLKATA 5.2 3455-., -.!, / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6.489:; / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , /TRUE COPY/ /# -.!,