The ITO, Ward- 1, Nadiad V. M/s. Jyoti Industries, Tal.Nadiad

ITA 2890/AHD/2004

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6890 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 6 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 04-04-2011
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 27-09-2004
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SOURYAWANSI
• Assessee Lawyers: M K PATEL
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

- 1 - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH D AHMEDABAD BEFORE S/SHRI MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT, JM AND D.C.AGRAWAL , AM THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NADIAD. VS. JYOTI INDUSTRIES, ANNAPURNA UDYOGWADI, DUMRAL VILLAGE ROAD, DUMRAL, TAL. NADIAD. (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY :- SHRI SOURYAWANSI, DR RESPONDENT BY:- SHRI M. K. PATEL, AR O R D E R PER D.C. AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN BY THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS OBJECTION BY THE ASSESSEE. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS IN ITS APPEAL:- (1) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT (A) ERRED IN DELETING ADDITION OF RS.96,160 /- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED PURCHASES OF LEAD SCRAP. (2) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING ADDITION OF RS.1,82,21 2/- AND RS.20,750/- MADE BY AO FOR UNACCOUNTED PURCHASE OF BATTERY PLATES. (3) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING ADDITION OF RS.2,21,80 2/- ON ACCOUNT OF DISCREPANCY IN CLOSING STOCK. ITA NO.2890/AHD/2004 ALONG WITH CO NO.325/AHD/2004 ASST. YEAR 2001-02 ITA NO.2890/AHD/2004 & CO NO.325/AHD/2004 ASST. YEAR 2001-02 2 (4) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE AO . 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS IN ITS C.O.:- (1) THE LD. CIT(A)IV, BARODA HAS GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN SU STAINING THE ADDITION OF RS.15000/- MADE TOWARDS UNACCOUNTED PUR CHASE OF LEAD SCRAP ON ESTIMATE BASIS. (2) THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.49,500/- ON ACCOUNT O F UNDER STATEMENT OF SALES VALUE OF CONTAINERS. (3) THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN CONFIRM ING THE ADDITION OF RS.8200/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF LABOUR CHA RGES PAID BY THE ASSESSEE. (4) THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN CONFIRMING T HE ADDITION OF RS.2495/- OUT OF COMMISSION PAID ON CONSIGNMENT SALES TO SISTER CONCERNS. 3. AT THE OUTSET, IT WAS NOTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE DEPARTMENTS APPEALS IS LESS THAN RS.2 LAKHS. DEPARTMENT OUGHT N OT HAVE FILED THE APPEAL. OUR VIEW IS SUPPORTED BY THE DECISION OF H ON. DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MANGLAM RICINUS LTD. (2008) 174 TAXMAN 186 (DEL). AS THE APPEAL SO FILED IS AGAINST THE EXECUT IVE INSTRUCTIONS WHICH ARE BINDING ON THE DEPARTMENT, WE DISMISS THE APPEA L IN LIMINE. 4. THE LD. AR DID NOT PRESS THE GROUNDS RAISED IN T HE CROSS OBJECTION HENCE THE SAME IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. ITA NO.2890/AHD/2004 & CO NO.325/AHD/2004 ASST. YEAR 2001-02 3 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF REVENUE AND THE CRO SS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE BOTH ARE DISMISSED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 8/4/11. SD/- SD/- (MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT) (D.C. AGRAWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMB ER AHMEDABAD, DATED : 8/4/11. MAHATA/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE REVENUE. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)- 4. THE CIT CONCERNS. 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1.DATE OF DICTATION 4/4/2011 2.DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING 5/4/ 2011 MEMBER.OTHER MEMBER. 3.DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P.S./P.S . 4.DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT.. 5.DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR .P.S./P.S 6.DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK .. 7.DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 8.THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSTT. REG ISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER 9.DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER..