S.K.Leather Corporation, CHENNAI V. ACIT Non Corporate Circle 17(1), CHENNAI

ITA 2523/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5032 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 30-08-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B. SAGADEVAN
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI , . , BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO. 2523/CHNY/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16 M/S. S.K. LEATHER CORPORATION, NO. 62, PERIANNA MAISTRY STREET, PERIAMET, CHENNAI 600 003. [PAN:AAAFS1859H] VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 17(1), NO. 16, GREAMS ROAD, CHENNAI 600 006. ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI G. BASKAR, ADVOCATE / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI B. SAGADEVAN, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 07.05.2019 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.05.2019 / O R D E R PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 5, CHENNAI, DATED 21.06.2018 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION SINCE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE FAILED TO NOTE THAT THE FIGURES OF EXPORT TURNOVER AND DUTY DRAW BACK PROVIDED BY CBEC RELATES TO DIFFERENT FINANCIAL YEARS VIZ., 2013-14 AND 2014-15. I.T.A. NO. 2523/CHNY/18 2 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 ON 26.09.2015 ADMITTING A TOTAL INCOME OF .38,42,180/-. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY TO VERIFY MISMATCH OF CUSTOM DUTY PAID AS SHOWN IN THE ITR WITH DUTY PAID AS PER EXPORT IMPORT DATA [CBEC TAB OF ITS] AS WELL AS VERIFICATION OF DUTY DRAWBACK RECEIVED AS SHOWN IN THE EXPORT IMPORT DATA [CBEC TAB OF ITS]. ON PERUSAL OF THE DETAILS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DONE EXPORT SALES FOR .1,94,45,977/- AND RECEIVED DUTY DRAWBACK OF .8,44,254/- AS PER EXPORT IMPORT DATA OF CBEC. WHEREAS, IN THE RETURN OF INCOME THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN DUTY DRAWBACK OF .4,75,621/-. SINCE THE ASSESSEE IS MAINTAINING THE ACCOUNT ON MERCANTILE BASIS AND SHOWN THE EXPORT SALES OF .1,94,45,975/- INCLUDING THE EXPORT SALES OF .1,46,25,548/- ON WHICH THE DUTY DRAW BACK .8,44,254/- RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE ENTIRE DUTY DRAW BACK AMOUNT WOULD HAVE BEEN ADMITTED. ACCORDINGLY, THE DIFFERENCE OF DUTY DRAWBACK AMOUNT OF .3,68,633/- WAS BROUGHT TO TAX. ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION. 3. ON BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IT IS THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD. AR THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER FAILED TO SEE THE MIXED FIGURES OF EXPORT TURNOVER AND DUTY DRAWBACK RELATES TO DIFFERENT FINANCIAL YEARS VIZ., 2013-14 AND 2014-15. THEREFORE, OBVIOUSLY, IT CANNOT TALLY WITH ONE YEAR I.E., FINANCIAL YEAR 2014-15. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMISSION OF I.T.A. NO. 2523/CHNY/18 3 THE LD. AR THAT THE MISMATCH FIGURES ARE NOT GIVEN IN THE NOTICES OF HEARING AND THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN THE INFORMATION INCOMPLETELY ONLY DURING THE HEARING AS GIVEN BY CBEC. THE LD. AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THERE WILL BE A SMALL DIFFERENCE IN THE FOREIGN EXCHANGE VALUE ADOPTED BY THE CEC AT THE TIME OF SHIPMENT AND THE FLUCTUATING BANK RATE AT THE TIME OF REALIZATION OF EXPORT VALUE. THE LD. AR FILED A PAPER BOOK EXPLAINING THE DETAILS OF EXPORT INVOICES, LEDGER EXTRACTS OF DUTY DRAWBACK RECEIVABLES AND EXTRACT OF BANK STATEMENT FOR THE PERIOD 01.08.2015 TO 28.08.2015 AND PRAYED FOR RECONCILIATION OF THE SAME. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE EXAMINED ALL THE DETAILS AND PASSED THE ORDER AND PLEADED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) SHOULD BE SUSTAINED. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES, PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. BY FILING THE COPIES OF THE EXPORT INVOICE IN THE FORM OF PAPER BOOK, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THAT THE EXPORT VALUE AND THE RECEIPT OF DUTY DRAWBACK PERTAINING TO TWO FINANCIAL YEARS VIZ., 2013-14 AND 2014-15 AS COULD BE EVIDENCED FROM THE EXPORT INVOICES. WE FIND FORCE IN THE ARGUMENTS OF THE LD. COUNSEL. ACCORDINGLY, WE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE AND RECONCILE THE SAME AND DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER ALLOWING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO SUBMIT ALL THE DETAILS AND EXPLAIN THE SAME BEFORE THE I.T.A. NO. 2523/CHNY/18 4 ASSESSING OFFICER. THUS, THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 21 ST MAY, 2019 IN CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (DUVVURU RL REDDY) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, 21.05.2019 VM/- /COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT, 2. / RESPONDENT, 3. ( ) /CIT(A), 4. /CIT, 5. /DR & 6. /GF.