Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Kanpur V. M/s Nikhil Technochem Pvt. Ltd, Kanpur

ITA 581/LKW/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 58123714 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 28-01-2014
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 19-07-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ALOK MITRA
• Assessee Lawyers: VIKAS GARG

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.581/LKW/2013 A.Y.:2006 - 07 A.C.I.T. - 6, KANPUR. VS. M/S NIKHIL TECHNOCHEM PVT. LTD., 702, LAKHANPUR HOUSING SOCIETY, KANPUR. PAN:AAACN4786H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI ALOK MITRA, D.R. RESPONDENT BY SHRI VIKAS GARG, ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING 28/01/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 3 1 /01/2014 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THIS IS REVENUES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT ( A ) II , KANPUR DATED 15/03/2013 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE AS UNDER: 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.10,00,000/ - MADE ON ACCOUNT ON DIFFERENCE IN STOCK FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADD ITION OF RS.10,00,000/ - MADE ON ACCOUNT ON DIFFERENCE IN STOCK FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS THAT THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY HIMSELF ADMITTED THAT THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ARE INCOMPLETE AND THE VERIFICATION OF STOCK IS NOT POSSIBLE AND NO OBJECTION WAS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY REGARDING 2 CORRECTNESS OF STOCK TAKEN BY THE DEPARTMENT DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY. 3. THE ORDER OF THE CIT ( A), KANPUR BEING ERRONEOUS, UNJUST AND BAD IN LA W BE VACATED AND THE ORDER OF THE AO BE RESTORED. 4. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO MODIFY ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OR TAKE ADDITIONAL GROUND DURING THE PENDENCY OF THIS APPEAL. 3. LEARNED D.R. OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WHEREAS THE LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT ( A). 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS O F THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE FIND THAT THE ADDITION WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER MERELY ON THE BASIS OF STATEMENT OF A DIRECTOR OF ASSESSEE COMPANY. A CLEAR FINDING IS GIVEN BY LEARNED CIT ( A) IN PARA 4.7 OF HIS ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS OFFERED AN EXPLANATION BEFORE THE ADIT (INV.), KANPUR AND THE SAME WAS NEVER REBUTTED BY ANY AUTHORITY. FOR THE SAKE OF READY REFERENCE, THE SAME IS REPRODUCED BELOW: 4.7 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND DECISION CITED BY THE APPELLANT, I HEREBY HOLD THAT THE ADDIT ION OF RS.10 LAC IS BASED ON THE STATEMENT OF THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY ALONE. NO INCRIMINATING DOCUMENT WAS FOUND NOR WAS ANY SUCH MATERIAL BROUGHT ON THE RECORD BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO SUPPORT THE IMPUGNED ADDITION. THE EXPLANATION OFFER ED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE ADIT (INV.) KANPUR, ADDL. CIT - 6, KANPUR AND BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NEVER REBUTTED BY ANY AUTHORITY. THEREFORE, THERE WAS NO REASON FOR MAKING ADDITION OF RS.10 LAC ON THE BASIS OF ALLEGED DISCLOSURE MADE BY THE APP ELLANT IN HIS STATEMENT. ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITION OF RS.10 LAC IS DELETED. 4.1 IN VIEW OF THIS CLEAR FINDING OF LEARNED CIT ( A), WHICH COULD NOT BE CONTROVERTED BY THE REVENUE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE 3 ORDER OF CIT ( A). WE UPHOLD THE SAME AND DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUNIL K UMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDI CIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 3 1 /01/2014. *C.L.SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTRAR