Shri Ganpatram Atmaram Thakkar, Patan V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-1, Patan

ITA 3237/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 323720514 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-02-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 13-12-2013
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 22-12-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DK MISHR A
• Assessee Lawyers: PRANALI V THAKORE

Judgement Text

, , , , SMC, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD, SMC BENCH . .. . . .. . , !' # ' !' # ' !' # ' !' # ' BEFORE SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT ITA NO.3237/AHD/2011 [ASSTT.YEAR : 2008-2009] GANPATRAM ATMARAM THAKKAR MARKET YARD, AT & PO-HARIJ, PATAN. /VS. ITO, WARD-1 PATAN. ITA NO.3238/AHD/2011 [ASSTT.YEAR : 2008-2009] UDAY CHANDULAL THAKKAR PROP. OF BHAGIRATH TRADING CO. 70, MARKET YARD AT & PO-HARIJ-382 440, PATAN. /VS. ITO, WARD-1 PATAN. ( (( (%& %& %& %& / APPELLANT) ( (( ('(%& '(%& '(%& '(%& / RESPONDENT) )* + , #/ ASSESSEE BY : PRANALI V. THAKORE . + , #/ REVENUE BY : SHRI D.K. MISHRA, SR.DR / + *01/ DATE OF HEARING : 13 TH DECEMBER, 2013 234 + *01/ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03-02-2014 #5 / O R D E R THESE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES FOR THE ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2008-09 ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), GANDHINAG AR. SINCE IDENTICAL ISSUE IS INVOLVED IN BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESS EES, THESE ARE BEING DISPOSED OF WITH THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. ITA NO.3237 AND 3238/AHD/2011 2. THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND OF THE APPEAL IN THE C ASE OF GANPATRAM ATMARAM THAKKAR IS GROUND NO.1 OF THE APPEAL, WHICH READS AS UNDER: 1. THE AO HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS IN FACTS BY MAKING ADDITIONS AMOUNTING TO RS.75,000/- ON THE GROUND OF FALL OF G ROSS PROFIT IN COMPARISON WITH EARLIER YEARS. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ALSO CONFIRMED THIS VIEW INSPITE OF THE FACT THAT EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR IS A SEPARATE ENTITY UNDER THE I.T.ACT. 1961. THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND OF THE APPEAL IN THE CAS E OF UDAY CHANDULAL THAKKAR, IS GROUND NO.1 OF THE APPEAL, WH ICH READS AS UNDER: 1. THE AO HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS IN FACTS BY MAKING ADDITIONS AMOUNTING TO RS.50,000/- ON THE GROUND OF FALL OF G ROSS PROFIT IN COMPARISON WITH EARLIER YEAR. THE LEARNED CIT(A) H AS ALSO CONFIRMED THIS VIEW INSPITE OF THE FACT THAT EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR IS A SEPARATE ENTITY UNDER THE I.T.ACT. 1961. 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEES SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEES ARE ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING OF GRAINS AN D OIL SEEDS ON WHOLESALE BASIS, AND WERE ALSO COMMISSION AGENTS. THE ACCOUNT STATEMENT ALONG WITH STATUTORY AUDIT REPORT UNDER S ECT IN 44AB WAS FILED WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME. THE ASSESSEES HAVE COMP LIED WITH ALL THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE AO FROM TIME TO TIME. THE AD DITION WAS MADE ON THE GROUND OF FALL OF GP AS COMPARED TO THE LAST YE AR, AND WITHOUT ANY SPECIFIC REASON FOR REJECTING THE ACCOUNT BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEES, AND THERE WAS NO DEFECT IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEES. TH E LEARNED DR HAS RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AO AND THE CIT(A). 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AO AND THE CIT(A). THE ASSESSEES RETURN OF INCOME SUPPORTED BY THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEES HAVE COMPLIED WITH ALL THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE AO DURI NG THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESS EES ARE AUDITED BY THE ITA NO.3237 AND 3238/AHD/2011 CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIO N 44AB OF THE ACT. NO DEFECT IN THE ACCOUNT BOOKS COULD BE POINTED OUT BY THE AO OR THE CIT(A). MERELY BECAUSE THERE IS A FALL IN GP, NO T RADING ADDITION COULD BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. NATURE OF TH E BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEES IS THAT THERE COULD BE FLUCTUATIONS IN TH E GP RATE OF THE ASSESSEES AS COMPARED TO THE EARLIER YEARS. IN THE ABSENCE O F ANY PARTICULAR REASON FOR REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED BY T HE ASSESSEE IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF BUSINESS AND DULY AUDITED, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT NO TRADING ADDITION COULD BE SUSTAINED, AND ACCORDINGL Y, THE ISSUE IS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND TRADING ADDITION MADE BY THE DEPARTMENT IN BOTH THESE CASES ARE DELETED, AND THE GROUNDS OF TH E APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEES ALLOWED. 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE. SD/- ( . .. . . .. . /G.C. GUPTA) !' !' !' !' /VICE-PRESIDENT C OPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1) : APPELLANT 2) : RESPONDENT 3) : CIT(A) 4) : CIT CONCERNED 5) : DR, ITAT. BY ORDER DR/AR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD