BHALOTIA BLEACHING & DYEING P. LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO WD 1(4), KALYAN

ITA 2530/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3951 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 25-02-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 16-04-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T A KHAN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN (AM) & SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (JM) I.T.A. NO. 2530/MUM/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 2007) BHALOTIA BLEACHING & DYEING PVT. LTD., NITIN B. DHAVAN & CO., GALA NO. 11, DHAMANKAR PLAZA, 1 ST FLOOR, DHAMANKAR NAKA, BHIWANDI - 421 302. VS. I.T.O, WARD - 1(4), KALYAN. ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) PAN NO.AACCB5908R ASSESSEE BY : SHRI K. GOPAL DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI T.A. KHAN (DR) DATE OF HEARING : 02.05.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.05.2016 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN, AM : - THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DT. 24.1.2012 PASSED BY CIT(A) - 1, THANE AND IT RELATES TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07. 2. THE SOLITARY ISSUE URGED IN THIS APPEAL RELATES TO ADDITION OF RS.8,09,894/ - RELATING TO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PURCHASES SHOWN IN THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT AND THE PURCHASE REGISTER. 3. THE LD. C OUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED T HAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT ENTER THE PURCHASES RELATING TO MATERIALS PURCHASED 2 BHALOTIA BLEACHING & DYEING PVT. LTD. ITA NO. 2530/MUM/2012 FOR CARRYING OUT REPAIR WORKS IN THE PURCHASE REGISTER , WHILE THEY HAVE BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR AS PURCHASES IN THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT AND THE SAME HAS RESULTED IN A DIFFERENCE OF RS.8,09,894/ - . THE LD. COUNSEL FURNISHED A RECONCILIATION STATEMENT SUBSTANTIATING THE ABOVE SAID CLAIM. 4. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT GIVEN ANY PROPER EXPLANATION WITH REGARD TO THE DISCREPANCY NOTICED IN THE PURCHASE ACCOUNT BEFORE THE AO AND HEN CE, CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION. 5. HAVING HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THIS ISSUE REQUIRES FRESH EXAMINATION AT THE END OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER , SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A RECONCILIATION STATEMENT BEFORE US. ACCORDINGLY , WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE SAME TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE DIRECTION TO EXAMINE THIS ISSUE AFRESH BY DULY CONSIDERING THE RECONCILIATION STATEMENT, INFORMATION AND EXPLANATIONS THAT MAY BE FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE AND TAKE APPROPRIATE DECISION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02.05.2016. SD/ - SD/ - ( AMIT SHUK LA ) (B.R.BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 02 .0 5 .2016 *SSL* 3 BHALOTIA BLEACHING & DYEING PVT. LTD. ITA NO. 2530/MUM/2012 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI