The ACIT, 3(1), V. M/s Indore Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd.,

ITA 525/IND/2007

• Counselvise Citation: [2009] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1456 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-11-2009
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 17-11-2009
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 12-10-2007
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K K SINGH
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

PAGE 1 OF 4 - 525/IND/2007 INDORE ROLLING MILLS PR IVATE LIMITED IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH : INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI V.K. GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PAN NO. : AAACI4290-F I.T.A.NO. 525/IND/2007 A.Y. : 2004-05 ACIT, M/S. INDORE ROLLING MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED, 3(1), VS 339, SHIVAJI NAGAR, INDORE. INDORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI K.K.SINGH, CIT DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANOJ GUPTA, C. A. DATE OF HEARING : 17/11/2009 O R D E R PER V.K. GUPTA, A.M. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE ARISES OUT OF ORDE R OF THE LD. CIT(A)-I, INDORE, DATED 26.6.2007, FOR THE ASSESSME NT YEAR 2004-05. 2. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND HAVE ALSO PERUSE D THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3. GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE READ AS UNDER :- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 96,14, 480/-, RS. 1,68,268/- AND RS. 12,48,280/- MADE TO ON ACCOUNT O F PAGE 2 OF 4 - 525/IND/2007 INDORE ROLLING MILLS PR IVATE LIMITED LIABILITIES AND PROVISIONS, DEEMED INTEREST INCOME AND DISALLOWANCE OUT OF OTHER MANUFACTURING EXPENSES BY ADMITTING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN ADMITTING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FIRS T THEN ASKING THE A.O. TO CONDUCT ENQUIRIES. 4. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT IN THIS CASE THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) WAS COMPLETED IN THE ABSE NCE OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS THE SAME WERE NOT PRODUCED BY THE ASSESS EE INSPITE OF SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES GIVEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DREW OUR ATTENTION TO R ELEVANT OBSERVATIONS OF THE A.O. AT PAGE 2 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. IT W AS ALSO CONTENDED THAT BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) CERTAIN ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WERE SUBMITTED AND THE LD. CIT(A) WITHOUT GIVING ANY OPPORTUNITY TO TH E A.O. DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE, WHICH WAS NOT CORR ECT IN LAW, HENCE, THE MATTER COULD BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. AT THIS STAGE, QUERY WAS RAISED REGARDING NATURE OF GROUND NO.2 OF REVENUES APPEAL. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT ADDITION AL EVIDENCES WERE ADMITTED WITHOUT HAVING COMMENTS OF THE A.O. HOWEVE R, HE FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT THERE APPEARED TO BE SOME MISTAKE IN THE DRAFTING OF THIS GROUND AS FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE APPELLATE ORDER, IT WAS EVIDENT THAT THE PAGE 3 OF 4 - 525/IND/2007 INDORE ROLLING MILLS PR IVATE LIMITED LD. CIT(A) DID NOT REQUIRE THE A.O. TO CONDUCT THE ENQUIRIES OR ASKED FOR REMAND REPORT FROM HIM. 5. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, ON THE OTHER HAND, CONTENDED THAT THE ISSUES WERE DECIDED BY THE CIT(A ) AFTER CONSIDERING THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF LAW AND HAVING REGARD T THE MATERIAL ON RECORD/DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE TRIED TO JUSTIFY THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) BY STATING THAT ONLY COPIES OF FEW STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS WERE FILED . HOWEVER, HE COULD NOT GIVE ANY EFFECTIVE REPLY TO OUR QUERY THAT WHY THE A.O. WAS NOT GRANTED AN OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE HIS COMMENTS ON SUCH DOCUMENTS, WHICH WERE NOT FILED BEFORE THE A.O. 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY BOTH THE SIDES, MATERIAL ON RECORD AND THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIE S BELOW. 7. IT IS NOTED THAT IN PARA 4 AT PAGE 8 OF THE APPELLA TE ORDER, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS MENTIONED THAT COPIES OF VARIOUS DOCUMEN TS WERE FILED ALONGWITH WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS. AS PER RULE 46A, THE LD. CIT(A) IS REQUIRED TO GRANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE A.O. IN RES PECT OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES ADMITTED BY HIM, WHICH HAS NOT BEEN DONE IN THE PRESENT CASE. HENCE, WE RESTORE ALL THE ISSUES RAISED IN THIS APP EAL TO THE FILE OF A.O. FOR HIS VERIFICATION AND DECISION THEREON AS PER LAW. I T IS NEEDLESS TO MENTION PAGE 4 OF 4 - 525/IND/2007 INDORE ROLLING MILLS PR IVATE LIMITED THAT THE A.O. SHALL GRANT AN ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY O F BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE IN DOING SO. 8. IN THE RESULT, THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STA NDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17 TH NOVEMBER, 2009. SD/- SD/- (JOGINDER SINGH) (V. K. GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED :_17 TH NOVEMBER, 2009. CPU* 1720D