Dinesh Agro Seeds, Uttrakhand V. ITO Ward-3, Kashipur

ITA 3077/DEL/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2009] 114 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8476 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-07-2009
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 16-07-2009
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 07-10-2008
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Rejection of books of accounts

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH `B: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.P.TOLANI,JM AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA, A M I.T.A. NO.3077/DEL OF 2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 M/S DINESH AGRO SEEDS, VS INCOME-TAX OFFICER, VILLAGE BALRAM NAGAR, KASHIPUR. GADARPUR, UDHAM SINGH NAGAR, UTTARAKHAND. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI PIYUSH KAUSHIK RESPONDENT BY : S HRI SARABJIT SINGH ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI: JM THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL. ONLY GROUND RAISED IS AS UNDER: THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN THE LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSED TURNOVER OF RS.347,340/- AS MADE BY THE AO. 2. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT T HE ASSESSEE IS DEALING IN SEEDS. THE AO ALLEGEDLY FOUND SOME DISCREPANCIES IN RESPECT OF UNLOADING WAGES PAID TO LABOURERS AND ON THAT BASIS REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND ESTIMATED THE TURNOVER MAKING HUGE ADD ITIONS. ACCORDING TO LEARNED COUNSEL, THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED COMPLET E RECONCILIATION OF UNLOADING WAGES AND THE REJECTION OF BOOKS WAS TOTA LLY UNCALLED FOR. ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED BEFORE AO AS UNDER: 2 YOUR GOODSELF HAVE REQUIRED FOR RECONCILIATION BETWEEN INTAKE REGISTER AND FREIGHT AND WAGES A/C. IN THIS REGARD, WE WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT THAT THE TOTAL OF FREIGHT AND WAGES A/C WILL NOT TALLY WITH INTAKE REGISTER BECAUSE OF THE REASON THAT IN FREIG HT AND WAGES A/C APART FROM UNLOADING WAGES PERTAINING TO WHEAT OF 6110 QUINTAL SOME OTHER WAGES ARE ALSO PAID TO LABOURS DURING THE NORMAL COURSE OF BUSINESS I.E. WAGES FOR STOCK TRANSFER, LOADING CHARGES ETC. AS AN ALTERNATIVE FOR YOUR VERIFICATION WE ARE ENCLOSING THE COMPLETE INTAKE QUANTITY AND RECONCILIATION CHART IN RESPECT OF INTAKE AS PER TH E INTAKE REGISTER WITH THE RESPECTIVE INTAKE VOUCHERS . IN THIS RECONCILIATION YOUR GOODSELF WILL THUS APPRECIATE AND OBSERVE THAT TOTAL INTAKE QUANTITY I.E. 10184 BAGS (6110 QTLS) AS PER THE INTAKE REGISTER TALLIES WITH THE TOTAL INTAKE QUALITY AS P ER THE VOUCHERS AND CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE GOVT. AGENCY I.E. UTTARANCHAL STATE SEED CERTIFICATION AGENCY. YOUR GOODSELF IS AWARE THAT THE INTAKE QUANTITY CAN ONLY BE AS APPROVED BY UTTARANCHAL STATE SEED CERTIFICATION AGENCY, THEREFORE, MY BOOK S OF ACCOUNT IS NOT FABRICATED. COPY OF VOUCHERS ON WHICH ADVANCE WAS GIVEN TO LABOUR AND WORK DONE BY THEM IS SHOWN IS ENCLOSED. THIS MISTAKE DOES NOT SHOW INCORRECTNESS AND INCOMPLETENESS TAKING ABOVE REASONS INTO CONSIDERATION IT WILL BE NOT JUSTICE TO REJECT BOOK S OF ACCOUNT UNDER SECTION 145(3). THE DETAILS OF RECONCILIATION AND VOUCHERS IN RESPE CT OF LABOUR PAYMENTS WERE FURNISHED WHICH ARE PLACED ON PAPER BOOK PAGE NOS.17 & 18. ON PAGE NO.18, ASSESSEE HAS RECONCILED THE FIGURES OF BOOKS WITH THE LABOUR PAYMENT. THE AOS QUERY WERE REPLIED IN A VERY PROPER MANNER , BUT GOT CONFUSED IN ADVANCES AND ACTUAL PAYMENT, WHICH HAVE BEEN COMPIL ED IN GREAT DETAILS. 3 AO IN SPITE OF CONSIDERING THE SAME IN A SUMMARY MA NNER REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND ESTIMATED THE TURNOVER AT 4 TIMES H OLDING THAT THERE WAS DISCREPANCY IN LABOUR DETAILS, THERE WAS NEITHER SC OPE FOR REJECTION OF BOOKS NOR ESTIMATION OF TURNOVER. 4. LEARNED DR IS HEARD, WHO SUPPORT THE ORDERS OF L OWER AUTHORITIES. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AS THE FACTS EMERGE, ASSESSEE FILED COMPLETE DETAILS ABOUT RECONCILIATION OF THE ALLEGED DISCREPANCY IN RESPECT OF UNLOADING WAGES AS POINTED OUT BY AO. DETAILS HAVE BEEN SHOW N TO US AND GIVE A COMPLETE BREAK UP TALLYING THE FIGURES BETWEEN THE ACCOUNTS AND CLAIM. IN OUR VIEW, THE AO SHOULD NOT HAVE REJECTED THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE WITH THE PRESENCE OF THIS RECONCILIATION ON RECORD SUPPLIED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS. THE AOS ACTION OF REJECTING B OOKS CANNOT BE UPHELD. IN VIEW THEREOF, ADDITION MADE IS DELETED. 6. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED ON THESE TERMS. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16 TH JULY, 2009. (R.C. SHARMA) (R.P. TOLANI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 16 TH JULY, 2009 VIJAY 4 COPY TO:- 1. APPELLANT. 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A), DEHRADUN 5. THE DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR.