IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH B KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DCIT, CIRCLE-1, AAYAK BHAVAN, 7 TH FLOOR, P-7, CHOWRANGHEE SQUARE, KOLKATA-69 V/S . M/S EXIDE INDUSTRIES 59E, CHOWRINGHEE ROAD, KOLKATA 700 020 [ PAN NO.AAACE 6641 E ] /APPELLANT .. / RESPONDENT /BY APPELLANT SHRI SACHINDANANDA SRIVASTAVA, CIT-DR /BY RESPONDENT SHRI BISHAN KR. SEAL, ACA /DATE OF HEARING 14.09.2015 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 28.09.2015 / O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS ARISING OUT OF ORDE R OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XX, KOLKATA IN APPEAL NO.103/C IT(A)-XX/CIR.1/2011- 12/KOL DATED 30.11.2012. ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY D CIT, CIRCLE-1, KOLKATA U/S 143(3)(II) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINA FTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 31.12.2008 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. ITA NO. 337 / KOL / 2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2005-06 ITA NO.337/KOL/2013 A.Y. 2005-06 DCIT CIR-1, KOL. V. M/S EXIDE INDS. LTD. PAGE 2 2. THE ISSUE RAISED BY REVENUE IN THIS APPEAL IS T HAT LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.12,50,20,559/- MADE U/S . 43B OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF EXCISE DUTY ON CLOSING STOCK. 3. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS A LIMI TED COMPANY AND ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING AND TRADING OF LEA D ACID STORAGE BATTERIES AND ACCESSORIES THEREOF. DURING THE YEAR THE ASSESS EE HAS VALUED THE CLOSING STOCK LYING IN THE FACTORY PREMISES AND AT ITS DEPO TS AT THE YEAR END AFTER INCLUDING THE ELEMENT OF EXCISE DUTY AMOUNTING TO R S.12,50,20,559/-. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THE DEDUCTION OF THE SAME AMOUNT O F EXCISE DUTY ON THE CLOSING STOCK OF THE GOODS BY DEBITED THE PROFIT AN D LOSS ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE DEPOSITED/PAID THE SAME AMOUNT OF EXCISE T O THE EXCISE DEPARTMENT BEFORE FILING RETURN OF INCOME UNDER SECTION 139(1) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE ONCE AGAIN CLAIMED THE DEDUCTION OF THE SAME AMOUNT OF EXCISE IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME U/S 43B OF THE ACT. SO THAT W AY THE AO CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS CLAIMING THE DOUBLE DEDUCTION OF TH E SAME AMOUNT OF EXCISE DUTY I.E. ONE TIME BY DEBITING THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND SECOND TIME IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME. HOWEVER THE ASSESSEE DEM ONSTRATED BEFORE THE AO THAT THERE WAS NO DOUBLE DEDUCTION OF THE EXCISE DUTY BUT THE AO DISREGARDED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND ADDED THE AMOUNT OF EXCISE DUTY IN THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A) WHO HAS DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY AO. AGGRIEVED REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US ON THE FOL LOWING GROUND:- 1. THAT THE LD CIT(A) IS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADD ITION OF RS.12,50,20,559/- MADE U/S 43B ON ACCOUNT OF EXCISE DUTY ON CLOSING STOCK SRI SACHIDANANDA SRIVASTAVA, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRE SENTATIVE APPEARING ON BEHALF OF REVENUE AND SRI BISHAN KR. SEAL, LD. AUTH ORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARING ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE. ITA NO.337/KOL/2013 A.Y. 2005-06 DCIT CIR-1, KOL. V. M/S EXIDE INDS. LTD. PAGE 3 4. THE LD DR VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE AO. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE IS ALREADY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE KOLKATA TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 1640/KOL/2012 AND HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN G.A. NO. 3187 OF 2013 IN THE OWN CASE OF ASSESSEE WHEREIN THE APPEAL WAS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE . THE LD. AR HAS SUBMITTED THE PAPER BOOK RUNNING INTO PAGES FROM NO.1 TO 50. IT WAS ALSO EXP LAINED THAT THE AMOUNT OF EXCISE DUTY WAS DEBITED IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCO UNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND CREDITED THE SAME AMOUNT OF EXCISE DUTY ON THE CLOS ING STOCK OF FINISHED GOODS (BOTH FOR DEPOT STOCK AND FACTORY STOCK) IN T HE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. IT HAD NEUTRALIZED THE IMPACT IN T HE PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE. NOW THE SAID DUTY IS ALLOWABLE BY VIRTUE OF THE PRO VISIONS OF SECTION 43B OF THE ACT IN THE RELEVANT YEAR. AND THE DUTY WHICH IS ALL OWED IN THE YEAR IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME, THE SAME DUTY IS OFFERED TO TAX IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME IN ORDER TO AVOID THE DOUBLE DEDUCTION. THIS PROCESS OF CLAIMING THE DEDUCTION AND ADDITION HAS BEEN EVIDENCED BY PRODUCING THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS IN THE FORM OF P APER BOOK. THE RELEVANT NOS. OF PAGES OF THE PAPER BOOKS ARE 45-47 AND 48-5 0 WHEREIN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005 -06 AND 2006-07 HAVE BEEN FURNISHED. 5. AFTER CAREFUL STUDY OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND EXAMINATION OF THE RECORDS, WE FIND THE AO HAS DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND OF DOUBLE DEDUCTION. HOWEVER FROM THE SUBMIS SION OF THE ASSESSEE, WE FOUND THAT THE EFFECT OF THE EXCISE DUTY IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT HAS BEEN MADE NEUTRALIZED BY DEBITING THE P&L AND BY CR EDITING THE CLOSING STOCK IN P&L ACCOUNT. BESIDES THE DEDUCTION CLAIMED BY TH E ASSESSEE IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME BY VIRTUE OF THE PROVISIONS O F SECTION 43B, IS OFFERED TO TAX IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR. HENCE THE QUESTION OF D OUBLE DEDUCTION DOES NOT ARISE. WE ARE ALSO RELYING ON THE JUDGEMENT OF HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF BERGER PAINTS (INDIA) LTD. VS. CIT 266 ITR 99 (SC). THEREFORE WE ARE ITA NO.337/KOL/2013 A.Y. 2005-06 DCIT CIR-1, KOL. V. M/S EXIDE INDS. LTD. PAGE 4 DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF REVENUE AND ALLOWING THE A PPEAL IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 28/ 09/2015 SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (WASEEM AHMED) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) KOLKATA, *DKP - 28/0 9 /2015 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / APPELLANT-DCIT, CIR-1, AAYAKA BHAVAN, 7 TH FL.,P-7 CHOWRANGHE SQUARE, KOL-69 2. / RESPONDENT- M/S EXIDE INDS. LTD. 59E, CHOWRINGHE E ROAD, KOL-20 3. , / / CONCERNED CIT KOLKATA 4. /- / CIT (A) KOLKATA 5. 1 44,, ,, / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6. 8 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , /TRUE COPY/ / ,,