Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 66162 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
4 month(s) 21 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
24-08-2012
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted
B
Assessment Year
1998-1999
Appeal Filed On
03-04-2012
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.668/HYD/2012 : ASSESSMENT YEAR 1993- 94 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX CIRCLE 2(1), TIRUPATI. (APPELLANT) V/S M/S. SRI VISHNU CEMENTS LTD., KADAPA. (PAN - AADCS 4055 M) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.491/HYD/2012 : ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998-99 C.O. NO.86/HYD/2012 (IN ITA NO.668/HYD/2012 : ASSESSMENT YEAR 1 993-94 M/S. SRI VISHNU CEMENTS LTD., KADAPA. (PAN - AADCS 4055 M) (CROSS OBJECTOR) V/S ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX CIRCLE 2(1), TIRUPATI. (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI A.C.GANGAIAH RE VENUE BY : SHRI GNANA PRAKASH DATE OF HEARING 21.08.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 24.08.2012 O R D E R PER D.KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THERE ARE THREE MATTERS IN ALL IN THIS BUNCH. TH E APPEAL BY THE REVENUE, BEING ITA NO.668/HYD/2012 FOR ASSESSME NT YEAR 1993-94 AND THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE, BEING ITA NO.491/HY D2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1997-98, ARE DIRECTED AGAINST A COM MON ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) GUNTUR DATED 1 5.7.2011. ITA NO.668 & 491/HYD/2012 & CO M/S. SRI VISHNU CEMENTS LTD., KADAPA. 2 ASSESSEE ALSO FILED CROSS OBJECTION IN THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1994-95. SINCE COMMON ISSUES ARE I NVOLVED, THESE MATTERS ARE BEING DISPOSED OFF WITH THIS COMMON ORD ER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. LET US FIRST TAKE FOR CONSIDERATION, THE MATTE RS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1993-94, VIZ. APPEAL OF THE REVENUE, BEING ITA NO.668/HYD/2012 AND CROSS OBJECTION BY THE ASSESSEE BEING CO NO.86/ HYD/2012. 3. EFFECTIVE GROUNDS OF THE REVENUE IN ITS APPEAL READ AS FOLLOWS- 1. 2. THE ROOT POINT IS, TO AFFORD OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE AND VERIFY THE CLAIM. THE ASSESS ING OFFICER HAS GIVEN MULTIPLE OPPORTUNITIES BUT NOT AV AILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 3. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DEMONSTRATED THAT THESE EXPENSES ARE CRYSTALLIZED IN THIS YEAR, BUT COMMISS IONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) MERELY RELIED UPON THE STATEMEN TS FILED. 4. THE A.O. IN HIS REMAND REPORT DAT.1.10.2008 HAS GIVEN A CATEGORICAL FINDING THAT THE ITEM -WISE EXPENDITURE IS NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY BILLS FOR BOOKING EXPENSES IN THE CURRENT YEAR. 5. THE RATIOS CITED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX(APPEALS) ARE ONLY OF GUIDING NATURE, AND ARE AP PLICABLE ONLY WHEN THE FACTS ARE ESTABLISHED. 6. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) SHOULD H AVE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE A.O. TO GET THE BILLS / VOUCHERS EXAMINED U/S. 46A(3). 7. .. 4. IN ITS CROSS OBJECTIONS, THE ASSESSEE RAISED GR OUNDS COUNTERING EACH OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF THE REVENUE IN ITS APPEAL NOTED ABOVE, AND SUPPORTED THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT( A). ITA NO.668 & 491/HYD/2012 & CO M/S. SRI VISHNU CEMENTS LTD., KADAPA. 3 5. WE HEARD BOTH SIDES AND PERUSED THE IMPUGNED OR DERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. THE DISPUTE INVOLVED IN THE A BOVE GROUNDS OF THE REVENUE RELATES TO PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES, WHICH HAV E BEEN DISALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, AS AGAINST THE DIRECTION OF THE CIT(A) TO ALLOW THE SAME. THE CASE OF THE REVENUE IN THE PRESENT APPEA L IS THAT DESPITE AMPLE OPPORTUNITIES GIVEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, ASSESSEE HAS NOT SUBSTANTIATED ITS CLAIM WITH REGARD TO PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES, AND THE CIT(A), BEFORE GRANTING RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE, HAS NOT GIVEN REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY AND EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE LIABILITY IN RELATION TO PRIOR PE RIOD EXPENSES HAVE BEEN CRYSTALLIZED DURING THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL, AND AS S UCH THEY ARE ALLOWABLE, AND THE CIT(A) WAS SIMPLY CARRIED AWAY BY THE STATE MENTS OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM. CONSIDERING TOTALITY OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE FIND IT JUST AND PROPER TO SET ASIDE T HE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AS SESSING OFFICER, FOR A FRESH DECISION TO REDETERMINE THE ISSUE DULY EXAMIN ING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE LIABILITY IN RELATION TO THE PRIO R PERIOD EXPENSES CRYSTALISED DURING THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL. HE SHALL GIVE REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLA IM, AND REDETERMINE THIS ISSUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, ACCORDINGLY, GR OUNDS OF THE REVENUE IN ITS APPEAL ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, AN D GROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE IN CROSS OBJECTION, WHICH MERELY SUPPORT T HE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND DO NOT CALL FOR ANY INDEPENDENT ADJUDICA TION, ARE DISMISSED BEING INFRUCTUOUS. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATSITCAL PURPOSES, AND THE CROSS OBEJCTION OF THE ASSESSEE, EBING INFRUCTUOSU, IS DISMISSED. ITA NO.668 & 491/HYD/2012 & CO M/S. SRI VISHNU CEMENTS LTD., KADAPA. 4 ASSESSEES APPEAL : ITA NO.491/HYD/2012 : ASSESSMENT YEAR 1997-98 7. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPE AL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1997-98 RELATES TO ADDITIONS OF RS. 6,17,865/- IN RESPECT OF PROVISION TOWARDS LEAVE ENCASHMENT; OF RS.1,39,2 25/- TOWARDS DONATIONS GIVEN; AND PAYMENT OF PRIOR PERIOD EXPENS ES OF RS.1,35,749 MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WHICH HAVE BEEN SUST AINED BY THE CIT(A) BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 15.7.2012. 8. WE HEARD BOTH SIDES AND PERUSED THE IMPUGNED OR DERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND OTHER MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE CIT(A) SUSTAINED THE ABOVE ADDITIONS VIDE PARA 15 OF THE I MPUGNED ORDER, OBSERVING THAT THEY ARE NOT PRESSED DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, AND AS SUCH THEY ARE DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED FOR . WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN NOT GOING INTO THE MERI TS OF THOSE GROUNDS MERELY ON THE GROUND THAT THE SAME WERE NOT PRESSED DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING BEFORE HIM, IN VIEW OF THE STATUTORY PRO VISIONS WHICH MANDATE THE CIT(A) TO DISPOSE OFF ALL THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM ON MERITS IN ANY EVENT, IN VIEW OF THE ASSESS EE, DISPUTING THE ABOVE OBSERVATION OF THE CIT(A) IN RELATION TO THOSE GROU NDS, WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A), WITH A DIRECTION TO REDECIDE THESE GROUNDS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND BY PASSING A SPEAKING ORDER ON THE RELEVANT ISS UES, AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. ASSESSEES GROUNDS IN THIS APPEAL ARE ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 9. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 10. TO SUM UP, WHILE THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1993-94, BEING ITA NO.668/HYD/2012, AS WELL AS THE APPEAL OF THE ITA NO.668 & 491/HYD/2012 & CO M/S. SRI VISHNU CEMENTS LTD., KADAPA. 5 ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1997-98, BEING ITA NO 491/HYD/2012, ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, CROSS OBJECTION O F THE ASSESSEE, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1993-94, BEING CO NO.82/HYD/2012, I S DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS,. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 24.8.2012 SD/- SD/- ( ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) (D.KARUNAKARA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER. ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. DT/- 24 TH AUGUST, 2012 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S. SRI VISHNU CEMENTS LTD. (MERGED WITH ZUARI CEM ENT LIMITED,) NO.1, 10 TH MAIN, JEEVANBHIMA NAGAR, BANGALORE 560 075. 2. 3. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 2(1), TIRUP ATI. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS), GUNTUR 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E - TAX, TIRUPATI 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ITAT, HYDERABAD B.V.S.
Mehul