ACIT, Faridabad V. M/s Lakhani India Ltd., Faridabad

ITA 2914/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 52468 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-08-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 03-06-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y KAKKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: M K MADAN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI AND SHRI K.D. RANJAN ITA NO.2914/DEL/11 ASSTT. YR: 2004-05 ACIT, RANGE-II, VS. M/S LAKHANI INDIA LTD., FARIDABAD. PLOT NO. 131, SECTOR-24, FARIDABAD. PAN/GIR NO. AAACL3113G ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : MS. Y. KAKKAR DR RESPONDENT BY: SHRI M.K. MADAN CA O R D E R PER R.P. TOLANI, J.M : THIS IS REVENUES APPEAL AGAINST CIT(A)S ORDER DAT ED 24-3-2011 RELATING TO A.Y. 2004-05. FOLLOWING GROUNDS ARE RAI SED: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN DELETING TH E ADDITION OF RS. 29,69,625/- MADE BY AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNDER VALU ATION OF STOCK EVEN WHEN THE ENTRY TAX LEVIED WAS INCLUDIBLE IN THE CLOSING STOCK OF THE ASSESSEE AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN DELETING TH E ADDITION OF RS. 29,69,625/- ON THE GROUND THAT THE ADDITION ON THIS GROUND HAS BEEN DELETED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF LAK HANI RUBBER UDYOG LTD. IN ITA NO. 3208/DEL/2007 FOR AY 2003-04. THE DECISION OF THE LD. ITAT WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE DE PARTMENT AND FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE PUNJAB & HARY ANA HIGH COURT HAS BEEN FILED AGAINST THAT ORDER. 2 3. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES FOR THE PERMISSION TO ADD, DELETE OR AMEND THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF APPEAL. 2. LEARNED DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF AO. 3. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ON THE OTHER HA ND CONTENDS THAT THE REVENUES APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED ON THE GROUND THAT THE ITAT ORDER DATED 19- 6-2009 IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ITSELF HAS NOT B EEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. ACCORDING TO LEARNED COUNSEL THE ITAT O RDER IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE, ON SAME FACTS, IS BINDING AND HAS TO BE APPLI ED FOR THIS YEAR ALSO. ITAT AFTER DETAILED CONSIDERATION OF THE ISSUE IN ITS CO NSOLIDATED ORDER HELD THAT ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF ENTRY TAX CANNOT BE MADE TO THE VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK BY FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS: 13. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, THE ADDITION CANNOT BE SUBSTANTIATED AS IN ANY CASE, THE ACT DOES NOT SPEC IFICALLY SAY THAT THIS TAX IS IN RESPECT OF PURCHASE OF ALL GOOD S, THE CONTENTION OF LEARNED COUNSEL THAT THE LEVY DEPENDS ON IDENTIFICATION OF RAW MATERIAL IMPORTED BY ASSESSEE , WHICH IS UTILIZED TOWARDS MANUFACTURE OF GOODS, WHICH ARE SO LD IN INTER STATE TRADE HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED. IN OUR VIEW, THE ASCERTAINMENT OF LADT HAS MANY CONTINGENCIES ATTACHED TO IT WHICH CAN BE DETERMINED AFTER YEAR END, FROM THIS ANGLE ALSO THI S DOES NOT AMOUNT TO DIRECT LEVY ON THE PURCHASE OF THE GOODS. IN VIEW THEREOF, WE UPHOLD THE DELETION. THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 4. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GONE THROUGH THE ENTIRE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND MERIT IN THE ARGUMENT OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE 3 ASSESSEE. SIMILAR ISSUE AHS BEEN DECIDED BY THE ITA T IN ITS ABOVE CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR A.Y. 1999-2000, 2000-01 & 20 03-04. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME, REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 10-08-2011. SD/- SD/- ( K.D. RANJAN ) ( R.P. TOLANI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 10-08-2011. MP COPY TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR