The DCITBharuch Circle, Bharuch V. M/s. Enviro Technology Ltd., Ankleshwar

ITA 2751/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 67749 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-09-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 16-09-2013
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 27-09-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: O P BATHEJA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD A BENCH BEFORE: SRI D.K TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTAN T MEMBER DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHARUCH CIRCLE, BHARUCH (APPELLANT) VS ENVIRO TECHNOLOGY LIMITED, ANKLESHWAR, DIST- BHARUCH PAN: AAACE4126G (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY: SRI O.P. BATHEJA, SR.D.R. ASSESSEE BY: SMT URVASHI SODHAN, A.R . DATE OF HEARING : 16-09-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27-09-20 13 / ORDER PER : D.K. TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THESE ARE THE REVENUES APPEALS AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-VI, BARODA DATED 26-05-2010. ITA NOS. 2749,2750 &2751/AHD/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02,2002-03 & 2003-04 I.T.A NOS. 2749,2750 & 2751/AHD/2010 A.Y. 2001-02, 02-03 & 03-04 PAGE NO DCIT VS. ENVIRO TECHNOLOGY LTD 2 2. SINCE ALL THESE APPEALS ARE AGAINST THE CONSOLID ATED ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), WE ARE ALSO DISPOSING ALL OF THEM BY PASSIN G A CONSOLIDATED ORDER. 3. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS IS DELE TION OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) LEVIED ON ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOW ANCE OF PROVISION FOR SLUDGE DISPOSAL CHARGES AMOUNTING TO RS. 17,75,790/ -, RS. 16,32,903 & RS. 10,95,250/- FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001-02,2002-03 & 2003-04 RESPECTIVELY. 4. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT DURING THE ASSE SSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT ASSESSEE HAD MADE A PROVISION OF RS. 17,75,790/-, RS. 16,32,903 & RS. 10,95,250/- F OR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001-02,2002-03 & 2003-04 RESPECTIVELY UNDER THE HE AD SLUDGE DISPOSAL CHARGES. IT WAS ALSO NOTICED THAT THE PROVISION WA S MADE IN THE MONTH OF MARCH AND NO ACTUAL EXPENSES WERE INCURRED BY THE A SSESSEE. THE ACCOUNTING STANDARD I & II NOTIFIED BY BOARD WERE A LSO NOT APPLIED BY THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY. THEREFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED THIS PROVISION AS NOTHING BUT A CONTINGENT LIABILITY CREDITED IN THE BOOKS TO REDUCE THE TAXABLE INCOME AND DISALLOWED THE SAME ACCORDINGLY. PENALT Y PROCEEDINGS WERE ALSO INITIATED. THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AGAINST THIS DISALLOWANCE BUT LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTI ON OF ASSESSING OFFICER. ACCORDINGLY, AO LEVIED PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT FOR ALL THE THREE YEARS. IN APPEAL LD. CIT(A) DELETED THIS PENALTY. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE ACTION OF LD. CIT(A), NOW THE R EVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. I.T.A NOS. 2749,2750 & 2751/AHD/2010 A.Y. 2001-02, 02-03 & 03-04 PAGE NO DCIT VS. ENVIRO TECHNOLOGY LTD 3 6. AT THE TIME OF HEARING LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE AS SESSEE AT THE OUTSET SUBMITTED THAT ADDITION MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT O F DISALLOWANCE OF PROVISION FOR SLUDGE DISPOSAL CHARGES AMOUNTING TO RS. 17,75,790/-, 16,32,903 & 10,95,250/- FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001-0 2,2002-03 & 2003-04 RESPECTIVELY HAVE BEEN DELETED BY THE HONBLE ITAT IN QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS VIDE ITA NOS. 735 & 736/AHD/2007 FOR A. Y. 2001-02 & 2003- 04 AND CO NO. 5/AHD/2007 FOR A.Y. 2002-03 DATED 04- 02-2011, THEREFORE PENALTIES U/S. 271(1)(C) DO NOT SURVIVE. LD. DR DI D NOT CONTROVERT THIS SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE WE FEEL NO N EED TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) IN DELETING THE PENALTY U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT FOR ALL THE THREE YEARS. 7. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE AT CAPTION PAGE SD/- SD/- (ANIL CHATURVEDI) ( D.K. TYAGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER J UDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 27/09/2013 AK / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,