M/s. Shri Junagadh Dist. Co. Op. Purchase & Sales Union Ltd., RAJKOT-GUJARAT V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), JUNAGADH

ITA 499/RJT/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8870 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 3 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 16-03-2018
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 10-12-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K L SOLANKI D R

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT , ! '# $ , % ! & ' BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER #./ I.T.A. NO.499/RJT/2013 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) M/S. SHRI JUNAGADH DISTRICT CO. PURCHASE & SALES UNION LTD., SAHAKAR BHAWAN, OPP. BUS STAND, 1 ST FLOOR, JUNAGADH. / VS. THE ITO, WARD 1(2), JUNAGADH. !* # ./ + # ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAAAS 2484 D ( *, / APPELLANT ) .. ( -*, / RESPONDENT ) *, . / APPELLANT BY : -- NONE -- -*, / . / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K. L. SOLANKI, D.R. 0 1 / 2 / DATE OF HEARING 16 /03/2018 34 / 2 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 21 / 0 3 /201 8 5 / O R D E R PER MAHAVIR PRASAD JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AT THE INSTAN CE OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE APPELLATE ORDER OF THE COMMISS IONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-IV, RAJKOT [CIT(A) IN SHORT] VIDE APPEAL NO.CIT(A)- IV/0004/13-14 DATED 12/09/2013 ARISING IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER S.143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ( HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'THE ACT') DATED 18/02/2013 RELEVAN T TO ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2010-11. ITA NO.499/RJT/ 2013 M/S. SHRI JUNAGADH DISTRICT CO. PURCHASE AND SALES UNION LTD. VS. ITO A.Y. 2010-11 - 2 - 2. FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE: 1. THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT GIVING ANY OPPOR TUNITY TO EXPLAIN THE DELAY FOR 2 DAYS IN FILING OF APPEAL BEFORE HIM NOT CONSIDERING THE SETTLED LAW THAT AN OPPORTUNITY MUS T BE GIVEN. THE ORDER PASSED BY HIM NEEDS CANCELLATION. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS IN CO NFIRMING ADDITION OF RS.6,74,936/- IN RESPECT OF RETAILS FERTILIZED D IVISION. THE ADDITION NEEDS DELETION. 3. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS IN CO NFIRMING ADDITION OF RS.1,44,400/- IN RESPECT OF PETROL PUMP DIVISION . THE ADDITION NEEDS DELETION. 4. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS IN CO NFIRMING ADDITION OF RS.9,91,600/- IN RESPECT OF INDANE GAS DIVISION. THE ADDITION NEEDS DELETION. 5. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS IN CO NFIRMING ADDITION OF RS.11,02,676/- IN RESPECT OF WHOLE SALE FERTILIZ ED DIVISION. THE ADDITION NEEDS DELETION. 6. TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE LEGAL, STATUTORY, FACTUAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ASPECTS, NO ADDITION OF AN AMOUNT OF RS.6,74,936/- , RS.1,44,000/-, RS.9,91,610/- AND RS.11,02,676/- O UGHT TO HAVE BEEN MADE. THE ADDITION NEEDS DELETION. 7. WITHOUT PREJUDICE, THE ASSESSMENT MADE IS BAD I N LAW AND DESERVES ANNULMENT. 8 . WITHOUT PREJUDICE, NO ADEQUATE, SUFFICIENT AND REAS ONABLE OPPORTUNITY HAS BEEN PROVIDED. THE ASSESSMENT NEEDS DELETION. 9. THE APPELLANT ALSO PRAYES TO DIRECT THE LD.CIT( A) TO REFUND THE AMOUNT OF ITAT APPEAL FEES RS.10,000/- PAID BY HIM SINCE THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT FOLLOWING THE SETTLED LA W TO GIVE OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT TO EXPLAIN THE DELAY O F 2 DAYS AS MENTION AT GROUND NO. 1 ABOVE. 10. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD/ALTER/AMEND A ND/OR SUBSTITUTE ANY OR ALL GROUND OF APPEAL BEFORE THE ACTUAL HEARI NG TAKES PLACE. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E IS AN AOP CO. OP. SOCIETY AND TRADING OF SEEDS, PESTICIDES, FERTI LIZERS ON RETAIL AND WHOLE-SALE BASIS AND RETAIL TRADING OF LPG BOTTLE A ND PETROLEUM PRODUCT. ASSESSEE FILED RETURN DECLARING TOTAL INCO ME OF RS.NIL. ITA NO.499/RJT/ 2013 M/S. SHRI JUNAGADH DISTRICT CO. PURCHASE AND SALES UNION LTD. VS. ITO A.Y. 2010-11 - 3 - THEREAFTER, NOTICE U/S.143(2) WAS ISSUED AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. SUBSEQUENTLY, NOTICE U/S.142(1) ALONG WIT H DETAILED QUESTIONNAIRE WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREAFTE R, MATTER WAS DISCUSSED WITH THE LD. AR. A JUSTIFICATION OF CLAIM OF RS.23,10,434/- WAS ASKED WITH FOLLOWING DETAILS: SR. NO. PARTICULARS AMOUNT RS. AMOUNT RS. 1. NET PROFIT AS PER GENERAL AUDITED P & L 24,30,411/ - 2. LESS: - 01 . DIVIDEND U/S.80P(2)(D) 6,28,869.50 02 . RENT INCOME U/S.80P(2)(E) 61,553.00 03 . SUPPLY TO MEMBERS U/S.80P(2)( A)(IV) 14,35,777.50 04 . RETAIL N.P. AS PER BELOW CALCULATION 7,89,398.00 05 . BASIC DEDUCTION U/S.80P(2)(C) 1,00,000.00 NET TOTAL OF EXEMPTION 30,15,598.00 DEDUCTION LIMITED TO NET INCOME 24,30,411/ - TOTAL TAXABLE INCOME NIL 4. IN RESPONSE OF ITS CONTENTION, ASSESSEE FILED DE TAILED REPLY BUT LD. AO WAS NOT CONVINCED WITH THE REPLY FILED BY TH E APPELLANT HENCE, AO MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.4,63,880/-. 5. AGAINST THE SAID ORDER ASSESSEE PREFERRED FIRST STATUTORY APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND HE STATED IN HIS ORDER TH AT ON VERIFICATION OF APPEAL ADMISSIBLY REPORT RECEIVED FROM THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE NOTICE OF DEMAND WAS SERVED ON 27/ 02/2013, WHEREAS THE APPEAL WAS FILED BY THE APPELLANT ON 01 /04/2013. THUS, ITA NO.499/RJT/ 2013 M/S. SHRI JUNAGADH DISTRICT CO. PURCHASE AND SALES UNION LTD. VS. ITO A.Y. 2010-11 - 4 - THERE IS DELAY OF 2 DAYS IN FILING APPEAL. IT IS NO TICED THAT APPEAL MEMO IS FORM NO.35 IS NOT ACCOMPANIED BY ANY PETITI ON/LETTER FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. 6. SINCE, NO REASON WAS GIVEN BY THE APPELLANT FOR DELAY. THEREFORE, LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL WITHOUT HEARING OF APPELLANT. 7. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RELEVANT RECORD AND IMP UGNED ORDER. LD AR MOVED AN APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT B UT WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION AND A S WE CAN SEE LD. CIT(A) PASSED THIS EX-PARTE ORDER WITHOUT HEARING THE APPELLANT THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF THE JUSTICE, WE SET A SIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND REMIT THIS MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF TH E LD.CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE MATTER AFRESH AFTER GIVING AN OPPORTUNIT Y OF BEING HEARD TO THE APPELLANT. APPELLANT IS ALSO DIRECTED TO CO- OPERATE WITH THE LD. CIT(A) FOR DISPOSAL OF THIS APPEAL. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT IS ALLOWED. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 21 / 0 3 /201 8 SD/- SD/- ( ) ($ ) ! % ! ( PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA ) ( MAHAVIR PRASAD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED 21/ 03 /2018 PRITI YADAV, SR. PS ITA NO.499/RJT/ 2013 M/S. SHRI JUNAGADH DISTRICT CO. PURCHASE AND SALES UNION LTD. VS. ITO A.Y. 2010-11 - 5 - / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. *, / THE APPELLANT 2. -*, / THE RESPONDENT. 3. #8# 2 92 / CONCERNED CIT 4. 92 () / THE CIT(A)- IV, RAJKOT. 5. :; < %2%0 , , /DR,ITAT, RAJKOT 6. < = 1 / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, - :2 %2 //TRUE COPY// / ! '#$ ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) ! $%! &, / ITAT, RAJKOT 1. DATE OF DICTATION 19/03/2018(DICTATION-PAD 2 PAGES ATTACHED AT THE END OF THIS FILE) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 19/03/2018 3. OTHER MEMBER... 4. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S. 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ... 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER