Western India Ceramics Pvt. Ltd., Baroda V. The Dy.CIT.,Spl.Range-3, Baroda

ITA 3149/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6180 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 4 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 26-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 1992-1993
• Appeal Filed On: 12-12-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANITA SURESH HARDASANI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD SMC BENCH AHMEDABAD BEFORE, SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3149/AHD/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1992-93) M/S. WESTERN INDIA CERAMICS PVT. LTD., BARODA-PADRA HIGHWAY, VILL. & PO: PADRA, DIST.: BARODA 391 440 APPELLANT VS. THE DCIT, SPL. RANGE-3, BARODA RESPONDENT PAN: AAACW1838K /BY ASSESSEE : NONE /BY REVENUE : SMT. ANITA SURESH HARDASANI, SR. D.R. /DATE OF HEARING : 26.04.2017 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.04.2017 ORDER PER S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1992-93 ARISES AGAINST THE CIT(A)-III, BARODAS ORDER DATED 18.10.2011, PASSED IN APPEAL NO. CAB/III- 271/04-05, UPHOLDING ASSESSING OFFICERS ACTION DIS ALLOWING GAS CHARGES BILLED BY THE ONGC AMOUNTING TO RS.25,96,733/-, IN PROCEEDINGS U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 254 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT T HE ACT. ITA NO. 3149/AHD/2011 (M/S. WESTERN INDIA CERAMICS PVT. LTD. VS. DCIT) A.Y. 1992-93 - 2 - CASE CALLED TWICE. NONE APPEARS AT ASSESSEES BEHE ST DESPITE THE FACT THAT REGISTRY HAS SENT IT AN RPAD NOTICE DATED 07.0 3.2017. IT IS ACCORDINGLY PROCEEDED EX PARTE. THE INSTANT APPEAL IS THUS TAK EN UP FOR ADJUDICATION ON MERITS. 2. THE INSTANT LIS APPEARS TO BE THE SECOND ROUND O F LITIGATION BETWEEN THE PARTIES BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ON THE ABOVE SOLE ISSU E OF GAS CHARGES DEDUCTION. THE ASSESSEE IS A CONSUMER GETTING GAS FROM ONGC IN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR. THERE WAS A LOT OF LITIGATION BET WEEN GAS CONSUMERS IN STATE OF GUJARAT WITH THE ABOVE SUPPLIER. THIS LITIGATIO N REACHED UP TO THE HONBLE APEX COURT WHEREIN THE ISSUE STOOD SETTLED. THE AB OVE SUPPLIER THEREFORE RAISED BILLS OF CONSUMPTION OF RS.1,23,31,774/- IN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE ASSESSEE PAID A SUM OF RS.97,25,041/- IN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR THEREBY RESULTING IN BALANCE SUM IN QUESTION O F RS.25,96,733/- REMAINING UNPAID. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FRAMED A R EGULAR ASSESSMENT ON 28.03.1995 DISALLOWING THE SAME ON THE GROUND THAT THE IMPUGNED LIABILITY HAD NOT BEEN CRYSTALLIZED IN THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR SO AS TO BE ALLOWED. THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL. LEARNED CIT(A) ACCE PTED THE SAME IN HIS ORDER DATED 20.07.1995 AFTER CONCLUDING THAT THE AS SESSEES MERCANTILE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING WAS NOT RELEVANT AS THE ASSESSEE HAD RIGHTLY CLAIMED THE ABOVE LIABILITY IN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE REV ENUE FILED ITA NO.4689/AHD/1995 BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. A CO-ORDINA TE BENCH REMITTED THE ISSUE BACK TO THE CIT(A) FOR A FRESH DECISION TO CO NDUCT NECESSARY VERIFICATION. THE CIT(A) THEREAFTER HAS HOWEVER RE VIVED THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE AFTER GETTING REMAND REPORT FROM THE A SSESSING OFFICER THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ON ASSESSEES PART IN PROVING THE ABOVE LIABILITY TO HAVE BEEN CRYSTALLIZED IN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR. THIS LEAVES THE ASSESSEE AGGRIEVED. ITA NO. 3149/AHD/2011 (M/S. WESTERN INDIA CERAMICS PVT. LTD. VS. DCIT) A.Y. 1992-93 - 3 - 3. WE HAVE HEARD LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATI VE. CASE FILE PERUSED. BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ADMITTEDLY REJ ECT ASSESSEES CLAIM OF THE ABOVESTATED LIABILITY ON THE GROUND THAT THE SAME H AS NOT BEEN PROVED TO HAVE BEEN CRYSTALLIZED IN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE ASSESSEE APPEARS TO HAVE PLACED SUFFICIENT RELIANCE UPON ONGCS PLAINT IN CIVIL SUIT IN SEEKING TO HIGHLIGHT THE FACT THAT THE IMPUGNED LIABILITY D ID NOT FORM PART OF THE DISPUTED AMOUNTED THEREIN. LEARNED CIT(A) OBSERVES THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO BUTTRESS THIS PLEA. THE VERY FACTUAL P OSITION CONTINUES HEREIN AS WELL AS THE INSTANT CASE FILE DOES NOT CONTAIN THE NECESSARY EVIDENCE IN ORDER TO PROVE THE IMPUGNED LIABILITY TO HAVE CRYSTALLIZE D IN THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR. WE THUS FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE C IT(A)S CONCLUSION UNDER CHALLENGE. 4. THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. [PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS THE 27 TH DAY OF APRIL, 2017.] SD/- SD/- ( PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA ) (S. S. GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDIC IAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 27/04/2017 TRUE COPY S.K.SINHA / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / REVENUE 2. / ASSESSEE . ! / CONCERNED CIT 4. !- / CIT (A) (. )*+ ,--. . /0 / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. +23 45 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER / . // . /0