Gopal Jaybhagwan Agarwal, Pune V. Income-tax Officer, Ward - 7(2), Pune

ITA 404/PUN/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7263 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 06-09-2021
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 27-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S P WALIMBE
• Assessee Lawyers: HARI KRISHAN
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, PUNE (THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM . / ITA NO.404/PUN/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 GOPAL JAYBHAGWAN AGARWAL, S.NO.12, LAXMI NAGAR, YERWADA, PUNE- 411006. PAN : AIBPA6955B ....... / APPELLANT / V/S. ITO, WARD- 7(2), PUNE. / RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI HARI KRISHAN REVENUE BY : SHRI S. P. WALIMBE / DATE OF HEARING : 06.09.2021 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06.09.2021 / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- 8, PUNE (CIT(A) FOR SHORT) DATED 28.12.2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. 2. THE APPELLANT RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- 1. APPELLANT PRAYS TO DELETE THE ADDITION MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD 7(2), PUNE & APPEAL DISMISSED BY CIT (APPEALS) 8, PUNE, OF RS.5998448/-. 2. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND NO-1 ABOVE APPELLANT PRAYS TO RESTRICT THE ADDITIONS TO PROFIT ON SAID AMOUNT. 3. APPELLANT PRAYS FOR JUST & EQUITABLE RELIEF. 3. BRIEFLY, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE APPELLANT IS AN INDIVIDUAL CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS DEALING IN ALL TYPES OF SIM CARDS OF 2 ITA NO.404/PUN/2018 TELECOMMUNICATION OPERATORS. THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 WAS FILED ON 30.11.2014 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.7,95,990/-. AGAINST THE SAID RETURN OF INCOME, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 7(2), PUNE (THE ASSESSING OFFICER) VIDE ORDER DATED 21.10.2016 PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT) AT A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.67,94,440/-. WHILE DOING SO, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE AN ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK OF RS.59,98,448/-. EVEN AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE SAME CAME TO BE CONFIRMED. HENCE, THE APPELLANT IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. BEFORE US, IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER CONCLUDED THAT THERE IS DIFFERENCE IN VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK BASED ON THE PURCHASE AND SALES FOR THE MONTH OF MARCH, 2014 WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE TOTAL PURCHASE AND SALES FOR ENTIRE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. HE ALSO FILED AN APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN THE FORM OF PURCHASE REGISTER AND SALES REGISTER FOR ENTIRE YEAR. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THIS EVIDENCE COULD NOT BE FILED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ON ACCOUNT OF FACT THAT MATTER WAS HANDLED BY THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT UNDER WRONG PERSPECTIVE. HENCE, IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE BE ADMITTED AND THE MATTER MAY BE REMANDED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DE NOVO CONSIDERATION. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. SR. DR HAD NO SERIOUS OBJECTION TO ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AS WELL AS REMAND THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 6. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED IS MATERIAL TO DECIDE THE ISSUE WHETHER THERE IS DIFFERENCE IN VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK OR 3 ITA NO.404/PUN/2018 NOT. WE ARE ALSO SATISFIED WITH THE REASONS GIVEN BY THE APPELLANT THAT THE EVIDENCE COULD NOT BE FILED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ON ACCOUNT OF LAPSE ON THE PART OF THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT. THEREFORE, WE ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND REMAND THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DECIDE THE ISSUE IN APPEAL AFRESH DE NOVO CONSIDERING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BEFORE US. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 06 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021. SD/- SD/- (S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (INTURI RAMA RAO) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / PUNE; / DATED : 06 TH SEPTEMBER, 2021. SUJEET / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT. 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A)-8, PUNE. 4. THE PR. CIT-4, PUNE. 5 . , , , / DR, ITAT, A BENCH, PUNE. 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE.