, C IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.2614/AHD/2009 WITH CO NO.237/AHD/2009 / ASSTT. YEAR: 2007-2008 ACIT, CENT.CIR.4 SURAT. VS M/S.VIPAN INDUSTRIES SURVEY NO.91, OPP: NAVIN FLORINE UDHANA NAVSARI ROAD SURAT. PAN : AACFV 0591 R / (APPELLANT) / (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI D.C. MISHRA, SR.DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SANJAY KAPADIA ! / DATE OF HEARING : 25/08/2015 '#$ ! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 29/10/2015 %& / O R D E R PER BENCH: REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE ORDER O F THE LD.CIT(A)- II, AHMEDABAD DATED 17.6.2009 FOR THE ASSTT.YEAR 20 07-08. 2. ON RECEIPT OF NOTICE IN THE REVENUES APPEAL, TH E ASSESSEE HAS FILED CROSS-OBJECTION BEARING NO.CO NO.237/AHD/2009 . ITA NO.2614 /AHD/2009 WITH CO 2 3. THE REVENUE HAS TAKEN SEVEN GROUNDS OF APPEAL, W HICH ARE NOT IN CONSONANCE WITH RULE 8 OF THE INCOME TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES, AND RATHER DESCRIPTIVE AND ARGUMENTATIVE IN NATURE. IN BRIEF ITS GRIEVANCE REVOLVES AROUND A SINGLE ISSUE WHEREBY IT HAS PLEADED THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.3,84,72,206/- WHICH WAS ADDED BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF EXCESS STOC K OF MATERIAL FOUND AT THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE DURI NG THE COURSE OF SURVEY. 4. BRIEF FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A FIRM AND MEMBER OF COLOURTEX GROUP OF SURAT. A SEARCH UNDER SECTION 1 32 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT WAS CARRIED OUT AT THE COLOURTEX GROUP OF S URAT AND ITS ASSOCIATED CONCERN. THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF THE A SSESSEE WAS COVERED UNDER SURVEY ACTION UNDER SECTION 133A OF T HE INCOME TAX ACT, ALONG WITH SEARCH CARRIED OUT AT OTHER PREMISES. T HIS ACTION WAS TAKEN ON 26.7.2006. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 31.10.2007 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT NIL. THE LD.A O HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. HE MADE ADDITION OF RS.3,84,72,206/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNE XPLAINED EXCESS STOCK FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY. HOWEVER, WHILE COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME, IT HAS BEEN ACCEPTED AT NIL, BECAUSE, SHRI JAYANTILAL T. JARIWALA WHO AS THE HEAD OF THE GROUP, ACCORDING TO THE AO, MADE A DISCLOSURE OF RS.10 CRORES AND SET OFF OF THIS ADDI TION BE GRANTED AGAINST THAT DISCLOSURE. THUS, THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ULTIMATELY BEEN ACCEPTED AT RS.NIL, AND WHATEVER ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE HAS BEEN ADJUSTED AGAINST VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURE MADE BY SHRI JAYANTILAL JARIWALA. ACCORDING TO THE AO, AS PER THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, STOCK WAS 10,98,64,989 WHEREAS ON PHYSICAL VERIFICATION, THE ACTUAL STOCK FOUND WAS 14,83,37,195 AND THE SURPLUS STOCK HAVING VALUE AT RS.3,84,72,206/-. THE LD.AO HAS MADE THE FOLLOWING DISCUSSION WHILE ADDING THIS AMOUNT TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSES SEE. ITA NO.2614 /AHD/2009 WITH CO 3 ADDITION IN RESPECT OF EXCESS STOCK: AS REGARDS TO EXCESS STOCK OF COLOURS AND CHEMICALS , IT HAS BEEN CLAIMED THAT: (I) THE MATERIAL RECORDED IN STOCK REGISTER IS ON REAL VOLUME 100% PURITY BASIS (BILLABLE QUANTITY) AND THE MATER IAL AS PER PHYSICAL STOCK IS ON AS IS BASIS WHICH CONTAINS W ATER & MOISTURE IN NORMAL COURSE, AND THEREFORE, THE PHYSI CAL STOCK INCLUSIVE OF WATER AND MOISTURE CONTENT WHICH HAS B EEN CONSIDERED DURING THE SURVEY ACTION IS GREATER THAN THE ACTUAL PURE STOCK WHICH HAS BEEN ENTERED IN THE STO CK REGISTER. (II) FURTHER, IT HAS ALSO BEEN CLAIMED THAT THE BILLS AR E PREPARED ON THE 'AS IS' BASIS DEDUCTING THE WATER CONTENT. (III) PART OF THE STOCK HAS BEEN ACCUMULATED AT THE FACTO RY PREMISES FOR JOB-WORK AND SUCH STOCK BELONGS TO OTH ER PARTIES AND HENCE THESE HAVE NOT BEEN ENTERED IN TH E BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE HAVE BEEN CONSIDERE D. HOWEVER, THESE ARGUMENTS ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE ON ACCOUNT OF TH E FOLLOWING FACTORS: (I) NO SUCH FACT WAS BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE SURVE Y TEAM DURING THE PERIOD OF SURVEY. (II) FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO ESTABLISH THAT THE STOCK OF PRODUCTS LYING DURING THE SURVEY WAS NOT OF 100% PURITY, BUT ARE MOIST AND HYDRATED. (III) THE FACT OF STOCK STORED FOR JOB-WORK PURPOSES WAS NOT DISCLOSED BEFORE THE SURVEY TEAM AND NO JOB CARD WA S PLACED ON RECORD AS DURING THE SURVEY INDICATING TH E BELONGINGNESS OF THE STOCK TO CERTAIN THIRD PARTY. HENCE, THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS TAKEN TO BE UNACCEPT ABLE AND LIABLE TO REJECTION. HENCE, IT FOLLOWS FROM THE ABOVE DISCUSSION THAT TH E EXCESS STOCK BALANCES ARE LIABLE TO BE ADDED U/SECTION 69 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT FOR WHICH NO SATISFACTORY SOURCE HAS BEEN EXPLAINED. SECTION 69 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1 961 PROVIDES THAT: '...THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE INVESTMENTS WHICH ARE NOT RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, IF ANY, MAINTAINED BY HIM FOR ANY SOURCE OF INCOME, AND THE ASSESSEE OFFERS NO EXPLANATION ABOU T THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF THE INVESTMENTS OR THE EXPLANATION OF FERED BY HIM IS-NOT, IN THE OPINION OF THE [ASSESSING] OFFICER, SATISFACTORY, THE ITA NO.2614 /AHD/2009 WITH CO 4 VALUE OF THE INVESTMENTS MAY BE DEEMED TO BE THE IN COME OF THE ASSESSEE OF SUCH FINANCIAL YEAR...' THUS, SECTION 69 LAYS DOWN 3 CONDITIONS FOR TREATIN G STOCK DISCREPANCIES AS UNEXPLAINED: A. THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE CERTAIN INVESTMENTS (STOCK IN THIS CASE); B. THE INVESTMENTS ARE NOT RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF A CCOUNT, IF ANY MAINTAINED; C. THE EXPLANATION ABOUT THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF ACQU ISITION OF THE INVESTMENTS OFFERED BY ASSESSEE IS NOT SATISFAC TORY. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS MADE INVESTMENTS IN STOCK OF RAW MATERIALS AND FINISHED PRODUCTS WHI CH HAVE NOT BEEN RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS VIZ. THE STO CK REGISTER ETC. THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FURNISH ANY REASONABLE E XPLANATION ABOUT THE DISCREPANCY. IN SUM OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE EXPLANATIONS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT SATI SFACTORY. HENCE, ALL THE THREE CONDITIONS FOR APPLICATION OF SECTION 69 OF THE I. T. ACT ARE SATISFIED IN THE INSTANT CASE. IN THIS CASE, THE EXCESS STOCK OF MATERIALS TO THE TUNE OF RS. 3,84,72,206/- HAS NOT BEEN RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE EXPLANATION OFFERED BY THE ASS ESSEE, IN CONSIDERED OPINION, IS NOT SATISFACTORY. THEREFORE, VALUE OF SUCH EXCESS STOCK IS LIABLE TO BE ADDED U/S.69 OF THE IN COME TAX ACT, 1961. 5. DISSATISFIED WITH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSE SSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD.FIRST APPELLATE AUTH ORITY. IT WAS CONTENDED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE BUSINESS PREMISE S OF THE ASSESSEE WAS TAKEN ON LEASE BY M/S.COLOURTEX PVT. LTD. W.E.F . 10.7-2006. THE JOB WORK STOCK OF RS.2,91,96,630/- PERTAINS TO M/S. COLOURTEX PVT. LTD. SIMILARLY, SURVEY TEAM HAD WORKED OUT THE EXCESS ST OCK OF RS.92,75,576/- AT UNIT NO.3, WHICH WAS ALSO WITH M/ S.COLOURTEX PVT. LTD. THE ASSESSEE HAS POINTED OUT THE EVIDENCE COL LECTED DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY AND SUBMITTED DURING THE ASSESSMEN T PROCEEDINGS. THE LD.FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY WAS SATISFIED WITH THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND DELETED THE ADDITION. ONE ADDITION MA DE BY THE AO HAS BEEN DISCUSSED IN TWO PARTS BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS BY THE CIT(A). ITA NO.2614 /AHD/2009 WITH CO 5 FINDING RECORDED BY THE CIT(A) IN RESPECT OF BOTH T HE PARTS ARE AS UNDER: 7. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS AND SUBMISSIONS I AGREE WITH THE APPELLANT'S VIEW. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ALL TH E EVIDENCE SHOWING THAT ENTIRE MANUFACTURING FACILITY HAS BEEN GIVEN ON LEASE TO M/S. COLOURTEX INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. W.E.F. 10-7- 2006 I.E. PRIOR TO THE DATE OF SURVEY. EVEN IN THE RETURN FILED AND IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN INCOME FROM JOB CHA RGES ONLY WHICH IS ACCEPTED BY THE AO HIMSELF. HENCE, ASSESSE E WAS NOT HAVING ANY STOCK OF HIS OWN AND ALL THE STOCK BELON GED TO M/S. COLOURTEX INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. HENCE NO ADDITION IS CALLED FOR IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER, EVEN THE ASSESSEE. HAS SHOWN THE EXCISE REGISTER MAINTAINED AT THE PREMISES OF M/S. COLOURTEX INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. AT SURVEY NO. 80, PANDESARA AN D ALSO EXCISE REGISTER MAINTAINED AT THE PRESENT PREMISES SURVEY NO. 69/74, PANDESARA OF THE ASSESSEE. THERE IS RECORD OF MOVEM ENT OF RAW MATERIAL FOR JOB CHARGES IN THE EXCISE RECORDS SURV EY NO. 80, PANDESARA AND RECEIPT IN THE EXCISE RECORDS MAINTAI NED AT THE PRESENT UNIT SURVEY NO. 69/74, PANDESARA. HENCE NO ADDITION IS WARRANTED EVEN IN THE HANDS OF COLOURTEX INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. ALL THESE DETAILS WERE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER I N THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND AGAIN FILED IN THE APPEL LANT PROCEEDINGS, COPY OF WHICH WAS SENT TO THE AO FOR R EMAND REPORT AND IN THE REMAND REPORT NOTHING ADVERSE OR CONTRAD ICTORY REPORTED BY THE AO. EVEN THE EXCISE RECORDS SHOWN B EFORE ME CONFIRMS THE SAME. THEREFORE, THE ADDITIONS IS NOT JUSTIFIED AND IS DELETED. 11. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS AND SUBMISSIONS I A GREE WITH THE APPELLANT'S VIEW.-I HAVE ALREADY IN PARA. NO. 6 ABOVE THAT THIS PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN ON LEASE M/S. CO LOURTEX INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.W.E.F. 10-7-2006 I.E. PRIOR TO THE DATE OF SURVEY. HENCE, NO ADDITION IS CALLED FOR IN THE HAN DS OF THE APPELLANT AS ALL THE STOCK BELONGED TO M/S. COLOURT EX INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THE D ISCREPANCY IN THE VALUATION OF STOCK FOUND WHICH WAS DUE TO NOT C ONSIDERING THE PURITY PERCENTAGE BY THE SURVEY TEAM. THE SURVEY TE AM HAS TAKEN THE GROSS WEIGHT OF THE RAW MATERIAL WHICH IS NEVER PURE BUT HAS SOME VARIATION IN PURITY PERCENTAGE AND AFTER APPLY ING THE PURITY PERCENTAGE THE NET WEIGHT HAS TO BE TAKEN FOR APPLY ING THE RATE. THE APPELLANT FILED THE COPIES OF VARIOUS PURCHASE BILLS WHICH ITA NO.2614 /AHD/2009 WITH CO 6 CONFIRMED THIS PRACTICE THAT IN THE BILLS FIRST GRO SS WEIGHT IS- WRITTEN AND THEN PURITY PERCENTAGE IS WRITTEN AND T HEN BY MULTIPLYING THE PURITY PERCENTAGE NET WEIGHT IS WRI TTEN ON WHICH THE RATE IS APPLIED. THEREFORE, APPLYING THE RATE T O GROSS WEIGHT WILL GIVE THE ERRONEOUS VALUATION. EVEN AT THE TIME OF SURVEY, THIS WAS EXPLAINED BY MR. RAJENDRA PRASAD IN REPLY TO QU ESTION NO. 11. THE SAME EXPLANATION WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSING OFF ICER DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND ALSO EXPLAINED BEFOR E THE ADI IN INQUIRY PROCEEDINGS AFTER SURVEY BUT THE SAME WAS I GNORED. DURING THE APPELLANT PROCEEDINGS, THE COPIES OF THE BILLS, VOUCHERS WERE PRODUCED WHICH INDICATED THAT ASSESSEE'S EXPLA NATION IS ACCEPTABLE. THE COPY OF WHICH WAS SENT TO THE AO FO R HIS REMAND REPORT. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS THE EXPLANATION OF T HE ASSESSEE IS ACCEPTABLE AND EVEN NO ADDITION IS CALLED FOR IN TH E HANDS OF COLOURTEX INDUSTRIES P LTD. ALSO. HENCE, THE ADDI TION MADE IS DELETED. 6. THE LD.DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE AO. ON T HE OTHER HAND, THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE TOOK US THROUGH THE PA PER BOOK, WHICH IS RUNNING INTO 230 PAGES AND RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A). 7. WE HAVE DULY CONSIDERED RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GO NE THROUGH THE RECORD CAREFULLY. IN ORDER TO EXPLAIN THE STOCK PO SITION FOUND AT THE PREMISES, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSION S BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND PRODUCED EVIDENCES. COPIES OF THESE EVIDENCES HAVE ALSO BEEN PLACED IN THE PAPER BOOK. LET US TAKE A NOTE OF TH E EVIDENCES SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE INDEX TO THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE CIT(A) IS WORTH TO NOTE IN THIS CONNECTI ON. INDEX SR. NO. CONTENTS PAGE NO. 1. 1 ST WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BEFORE CIT(A) ALONG WITH JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS RELIED ON 1-21 ANNEXURE-1 COPY OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE IN FORM RC OF THE CENTRAL EXCISE DEPARTMENT EVIDENCING THE FACT THAT THE PREMISES OF THE APPELLANT (VIPAN) AND THE ENTIRE MANUFACTURING FACILITY ON THE DATE OF SURVEY BELONGS TO COLOURTEX 22 ITA NO.2614 /AHD/2009 WITH CO 7 INDUSTRIES P. LTD.) ANNEXURE-2 COMPLETE DETAILS OF MOVEMENT OF INVENTORY AT THE LOCATION NAMELY VIPAN OF THE APPELLANT 23-59 ANNEXURE-3 CONTRA CONFIRMING CHALLAN REGISTER OF COLURTEX INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. EVIDENCING RECEIPT OF MATERIAL FOR MANUFACTURING PROCESS AT THE PREMISES OF THE APPELLANT (I.E. THE BRANCH OF COLOURTEX INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.) ALONG WITH SAMPLE COPIES OF SOME OF THE CHALLANS. 60-75 ANNEXURE-4 COPY OF THE AUDITED ANNUAL ACCOUNTS OF THE APPELLANT AS ON MARCH 31, 2007 WHICH REFLECTS THAT THE INVENTORY AS ON MARCH 31, 2006 WAS ONLY RS.10,527/- AND AS ON MARCH 31, 2007 IT WAS NIL SINCE THE APPELLANT WAS NOT CARRYING ON ANY MANUFACTURING FACILITY. 76-89 ANNEXURE-5 COPY OF LEASE DEED EVIDENCING THE FACT THAT THE ENTIRE FACILITY OF THE APPELLANT WAS GIVEN ON RENTAL BASIS TO COLOURTEX INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. EFFECTIVE FROM JULY 10, 2006 I.E. PRIOR TO THE DATE OF SEARCH. ENGLISH VERSION OF THE SAME IS ATTACHED HEREWITH FOR THE KIND REFERENCE OF YOUR HONOUR. 90-94 94A 94D ANNEXURE-6 NOTING OF SURVEY TEAM AT THE PREMISES OF THE APPELLANT DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY PROCEEDINGS ITSELF THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS.291.96 LACS OF INVENTORY IS LYING THERE ON A JOB WORK BASIS AS PER QUESTION NO.11 RAISED TO SHRI RAJENDRA PRASAD PATEL, OFFICER OF THE COMPANY. ENGLISH VERSION OF THE SAME IS ATTACHED HEREWITH FOR THE KIND REFERENCE OF YOUR HONOUR. 95-117 ANNEXURE-7 COPY OF THE STOCK STATEMENT SUBMITTED TO THE BANK BY 118 ITA NO.2614 /AHD/2009 WITH CO 8 COLOURTEX INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., WHICH INCLUDES THE STOCK LYING AT THE LOCATION OF THE APPELLANT, FOR JUSTIFYING THE OWNERSHIP OF THE INVENTORY IN THEIR NAME AS ON THE YEAR END. ANNEXURE-8 COPY OF LETTER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LEARNED AO TO JUSTIFY THE STOCK DISCREPANCY OF RS.92.75 LACS. 119-181 8. THE FIRST EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE IS A REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE IN FORM RC OF THE CENTRAL EXCISE DEPART MENT AVAILABLE AT PAGE NO.22. THE RELEVANT PART OF THE CERTIFICATE R EAD AS UNDER: FORM RC CENTRAL EXCISE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE (UNDER RULE 9 OF THE CENTRAL EXCISE RULES, 2002) THIS IS TO CERTIFY, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS SPECIFIED BELOW, THAT M/S.COLOURTEX INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, A REGISTE RED COMPANY (REGISTRANT AND ITS CONSTITUTIONS) IS REGIS TERED OF MANUFACTURING OF EXCISABLE GOODS (TYPE OF BUSINESS) AT COLOURTEX INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, 69 TO 73, 73/ A, GIDC, PANDESARA, PANDESARA IE, SURAT, GUJARAT, 3942 21 (ADDRESS OF THE BUSINESS PREMISES) ON THE BASIS OF THE APPLICATION RECEIVED IN THIS OFFICE ON 07/07/2006 (DATE OF RECE IPT) REGISTRATION NUMBER IS : AABCP6359BXM003 (W.E.F. 8.00 AM ON 10/07/2006) SD/- SATHAPPAN ASSISTNAT COMMISSIONER C.EX.DIV.III, SURAT-1 SIGNATURE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTR AL EXCISE (WITH NAME AND OFFICIAL SEAL) DATE : 07/07/2006 PLACE : SURAT 9. THE SECOND EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DETAILS OF MOVEMENT OF INVENTORY AT THE LOCATION VIZ. VIPAN. COPIES OF THESE EVIDENCES ARE FILED AT PAGE NOS.23 TO 59. FOR EXAM PLE, VIDE CHALLAN ITA NO.2614 /AHD/2009 WITH CO 9 NO.1761 DATED 8.9.2006, COLOURTEX INDUSTRIES PVT. L TD. HAS MADE A MOVEMENT OF SCARLET BR PRESS CAKE (SEMI FINISHED) H AVING QUANTITY OF 1,244 HAVING VALUE OF RS.1,61,720/-. THE CHALLAN W AS CLEARED ON 17.7.2006. THERE ARE NUMBER OF OTHER ENTRIES WHOSE BILLS WERE PREPARED ON 7.7.2006 AND IT WAS CLEARED ON 13.7.200 6 ETC. OBJECT OF REFERRING THESE DOCUMENTS IS FOR THE REASON TO DEMO NSTRATE THAT THIS PREMISES WAS BEING ACTUALLY USED BY COLOURTEX INDUS TRIES PVT. LTD. BEFORE THE SURVEY CARRIED AT THE PREMISES. THE COP Y OF LEASE-DEED HAS ALSO BEEN PLACED ON RECORD. THE LD.CIT(A) HAS CONSI DERED ALL THESE MATERIALS, AND THEREAFTER DELETED THE ADDITION. IF WE HAVE A GLANCE ON THESE EVIDENCES, COUPLED WITH FINDING OF THE CIT(A) AND COMPARE IT WITH THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE AO EXTRACTED ABOVE, THEN IT WOULD REVEAL THAT THE LD.AO HAS NOT APPLIED HIS MIND ON ANY OF THE EV IDENCES OR ANY OF THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE. THE LD.AO HAS N OT EVEN NOTED THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSM ENT ORDER IS JUST A CUT-AND-PASTE FROM OTHER ASSESSMENT ORDERS. WE CAN OBSERVE SO, BECAUSE, WE HAVE SEEN MORE THAN TWENTY ASSESSMENT O RDERS OF THIS GROUP WHILE HEARING ALL THESE APPEALS. STANDARD LA NGUAGE HAS BEEN USED MORE SPECIFICALLY FROM PAGE NO.4 TO END. THUS , IF WE WEIGH REASONING GIVEN BY THE AO FOR MAKING ADDITION VIS- -VIS REASONING GIVEN BY THE LD.CIT(A) FOR DELETING THE ADDITION IN THE L IGHT OF THE MATERIAL PRODUCED IN THE PAPER BOOK BY THE ASSESSEE, THEN, C ERTAINLY SCALE WOULD TILT IN FAVOUR OF THE CIT(A). THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. IT IS DISMISSED. 10. AS FAR AS CO FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS CONCERNED , WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT SUB-SECTION 4 OF SECTION 253 AUTHORISES T HE RESPONDENT TO FILE CROSS-OBJECTION ON RECEIPT OF NOTICE IN APPEAL. TH E CO IS REQUIRED TO BE FILED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF NOTICE AND IT IS TO BE VERIFIED IN THE MANNER AKIN TO AN APPEAL, BUT, THE CO IS TO BE FILE D AGAINST ANY PART OF THE ORDER IMPUGNED IN THE APPEAL. IN THE CO FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, HE ITA NO.2614 /AHD/2009 WITH CO 10 HAS NOWHERE DEMONSTRATED HIS GRIEVANCES AGAINST ANY PART OF THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), AS SUCH, THE CO IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN THE PRESENT FORM. 11. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AS WELL AS CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE, BOTH ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 29 TH OCTOBER, 2015 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER