M/s. Bharat Wire Industries, Navsari V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-1, Navsari

ITA 384/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 38420514 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-02-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 01-08-2013
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 08-02-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B L YADAV
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJESH UPADHYAY
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

, , , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD, D BENCH . .. . . .. . , !! '#$ !! '#$ !! '#$ !! '#$, , , , %& %& %& %& % %% %. .. .' '' ' . .. .() () () (), , , , '* + '* + '* + '* + ' $ ' $ ' $ ' $ BEFORE S/SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT AND A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA NO.384/AHD/2010 [ASSTT.YEAR : 2006-2007] M/S. BHARAT WIRE INDUSTRIES SURVEYNO.522, VILLAGE-NADARKHA CHIKHLI ROAD BILIMORE (E). ! /VS. ITO, WARD-1 NAVSARI. ( (( (-. -. -. -. / APPELLANT) ( (( (/0-. /0-. /0-. /0-. / RESPONDENT) ! 12 3 4 '/ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAJESH UPADHYAY + 3 4 '/ REVENUE BY : SHRI B.L. YADAV !6 3 2*/ DATE OF HEARING : 2 ND JANUARY, 2012 7(8 3 2*/ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03-02-2012 '9 / O R D E R PER G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y.2006-2007 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), VALSAD. 2. THE GROUND NO.1 OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL READS A S UNDER: 1. LD.AO HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS TO ADD AN A MOUNT OF RS.4,29,500/- AMOUNT WITHDRAWN FROM DYNAMIC WIRE IN DUSTRIES BY THE PARTNER RAMGOPAL B. AGRAWAL AND ANOTHER PARTN ER SMT. SARLA RAVIKUMAR NEMANI RS.3,97,700/- AS THEIR CAPIT AL AND CONTRIBUTING THE SAME IN THE APPELLANT FIRM. LD. C IT(A) HAS ALSO ERRED TO CONFIRM ITOS ACTION. 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED T HAT THE ISSUE OF DEPOSIT MADE BY THE PARTNER OF THE ASSESSEE-FIRM IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF ITA NO.384/AHD/2010 -2- THE ASSESSEE WITH THE DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICT IONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. PANKAJ DYESTUFF INDUSTRIES, TAX APP EAL NO.241 OF 1993 DATED 06-07-2005. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE PARTNERS A RE ASSESSED TO TAX SEPARATELY. THE LEARNED DR HAS RELIED ON THE ORDER S OF THE AO AND THE CIT(A). 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIND T HAT THE DEPOSITS ARE MADE BY THE PARTNERS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM AND T HE ASSESSEE HAS FILED EXPLANATION EXPLAINING THE SOURCE OF DEPOSITS. THE PARTNERS ARE SEPARATELY ASSESSED TO TAX AND THIS FACT COULD NOT BE CONTROVE RTED BY THE REVENUE. THE ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY T HE DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PANKAJ DYE STUFF INDUSTRIES (SUPRA) AND ACCORDINGLY WE HOLD THAT THE ISSUE OF SOURCE OF CREDITS IN THE PARTNERS ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE-FIRM COULD BE CONSIDERED I N THE INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENT OF THE PARTNER CONCERNED AND NO ADDITION IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE-FIRM IS CALLED FOR. ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDI TION MADE IS DELETED AND THE GROUND NO.1 OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 5. THE GROUND NO.2 OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL READS A S UNDER: 2. THE LD.AO HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS TO DISA LLOW 20% OF LOADING CHARGES OF RS.77,973/- AND RS.1,89,813/- TR ANSPORTATION CHARGES ON AD HOC BASIS AND ADDED AS INCOME. 6. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED T HAT RS.77,973/- REPRESENTS SALES TAX PAYMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE A ND HAS BEEN WRONGLY TAKEN AS LOADING CHARGES BY THE AO AND THE CIT(A). HE SUBMITTED THAT THE DISALLOWANCES OUT OF TRANSPORTATION CHARGES WER E MADE ON AD HOC BASIS WITHOUT ANY BASIS. THE LEARNED DR RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AO ITA NO.384/AHD/2010 -3- AND THE CIT(A). HE SUBMITTED THAT THE EXPENSES WER E UN-VOUCHED AND UNVERIFIABLE. 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AO AND THE CIT(A). IN THE FACTS OF THE CASE, W E CONSIDER IT JUSTIFIED TO SET ASIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH D IRECTION TO DECIDE THE ISSUE DE NOVO ON MERIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING RE ASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE DIR ECT ACCORDINGLY. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE. SD/- SD/- ( % %% %. .. .' '' ' . .. .() () () () /A.K. GARODIA) '* + /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . .. . . .. . /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