Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bareilly V. M/s Ashoka Poly Laminators Ltd., Bareilly

ITA 617/LKW/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 61723714 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-05-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 21-05-2014
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 07-08-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ALOK MITRA
• Assessee Lawyers: R AGARWAL
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure; Depreciation; Onus to prove
• Section: 69C; 115JB

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B , LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI S UNIL KUMAR YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. A. K. GARODIA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 617/LKW/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009 - 10 DY. CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE BAREILLY V. M/S ASHOKA P OLY LAMINATORS LTD. BAREILLY PAN: AAECA5584G (APP ELL ANT) (RESPONDENT) APP ELL ANT BY: SHRI. ALOK MITRA, D.R. RESPONDENT BY: SHRI. R. AGARWAL, C.A. DATE OF HEARING: 21 05 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 27 05 2014 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV: T HIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), INTER ALIA, ON VARIOUS GROUNDS, WHICH ARE AS UNDER: - 1 . THAT LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 11,65,500/ - M ADE U/S 69C OF I.T. ACT , 1961 ON ACC OUNT OF UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE WITHOUT VERIFYING THE FACTS & ASSIGNING ANY LOGICAL REASON. 2 . THAT LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 11,65,500/ - ON A WRONG APPLICATION OF FACTS AND LAW AND WITHOUT ANY BASIS IGNORING THE FACTS BROUGHT ON THE RECORDS BY THE A.O. AND BY SUBSTITUTING ITS OWN SATISFACTION IN PLACE OF AO'S SATISFACTION BY HOLDING THAT THE A.O. HAS FAILED TO DISCHARGE HIS BURDEN TO PROVE THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED BUT NOT PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 2 - : RECORDED. 3 . THAT THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN L AW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,43,069/ - DISALLOWED ON ACCOUNT OF DEPRECIATION ON ELECTRIC INSTALLATION COST WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE SETTLED LAW THAT DEPRECIATION CANNOT BE CLAIMED ON AN ASSET WHICH IS NOT OWNED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. 4 . T HAT THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETIO N THE ADDITION AMOUNTING TO RS. 1,52,927/ - ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE ON SLM DEPRECIATION ON EQUIPMENT @ 7.42% IN COMPUTATION ON BOOK PROFIT U/S 115 JB WITHOUT ASSIGNING ANY LOGICAL REASON THAT THE ALL EGED ISSUE SIMPLY STANDS DECIDED IN THE ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE IN IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING YEAR I.E. (A.Y. 2007 - 08 & 2008 - 09) THUS IGNORING THAT PAST YEARS FINDING CANNOT BE A PRECEDENCE FOR SUBSEQUENT YEAR. 5 . THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A) BEING ERRONEOUS IN L AW AND ON FACTS WHICH NEEDS TO BE VACATED AND THE ORDER OF THE A.O. BE RESTORED. 2 . THE LD. D.R. PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3 . T HE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE , ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS INVITED OUR ATTENTION THAT THE IMPUGNED ISSUES ARE SQUARELY COVERED BY THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING YEAR I.E. ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09. THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL DATED 7.8.2013 IS PLACED ON RECORD. 4 . HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BEL OW, WE FIND THAT BOTH THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL ARE SQUARELY COVERED BY THE PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 3 - : ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 7.8.2013. F OR THE SAKE OF REFERENCE, WE EXTRACT THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AS UNDER: - 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED RE PRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF THE APPLICABLE LEGAL POSITION. 8. AS LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) HAS RIGHTLY NOTED, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF ANY EXPENDITURE BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH HAS NOT BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS ALSO NOT THE CASE THAT, EVEN AS PER SEIZED MATERIAL ON STATEMENT RECORDED, THE DISCOUNT ALLOWED HAS BEEN RECEIVED BACK BY THE VENDOR IN CASH. THE CALCULATIONS SHOWN IN THE SEIZED PAPER, IN ANY CASE DO NOT INDICATE ANY PAYMENT EVIDENCE OF WHICH IS SINE QUA NON FOR MAKING ADDITION UNDER SECTION 69C OF THE ACT. IN VIEW OF THESE DISCUSSIONS, AS ALSO BEARING IN MIND ENTIRETY OF THE CASE, WE APPROVE THE CONCLUSIONS ARRIVED AT AND DECLINE TO INTERFERE IN THE MAT TER. 9. GROUND NOS. 1 & 2 ARE THUS DISMISSED. 10. IN GROUND NOS.3 & 4, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GRIEVANCES: - (3) THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.2,85,964/ - DISALLOWED ON ACCOUN T OF DEPRECIATION ON ELECTRIC INSTALLATION COST WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE SETTLED LAW THAT DEPRECIATION CANNOT BE CLAIMED ON AN ASSET WHICH IS NOT OWNED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. (4) THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF R S.1,52,927/ - ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE ON SLM DEPRECIATION ON EQUIPMENT @ 7.42% IN COMPUTATION ON BOOK PROFIT UNDER SECTION 115JB WITHOUT ASSIGNING ANY LOGICAL REASON THAT THE ALLEGED ISSUE SIMPLY STANDS DECIDED IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN IMMEDIATELY P RECEDING YEAR, I.E. (A.Y. 2007 - 08) THUS IGNORING THAT PAST YEARS FINDING CANNOT BE A PRECEDENCE FOR SUBSEQUENT YEAR. PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 4 - : 11. LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES FAIRLY AGREE THAT THE ABOVE ISSUES WERE DECIDED, IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE, BY CIT(APPEALS)'S ORDER FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 08, WHICH HAS ACHIEVED FINALITY AS IT WAS ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, C I T(APPEALS)'S CONCLUSIONS DO NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERE ON THESE ISSUES EITHER. GROUND NOS. 3 & 4 ARE ALSO, ACCORDINGLY, DISMISSED. 5 . WE, THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE SAME , DECIDE THE IMPUGNED ISSUES IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS CONFIRMED AND THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27.5.2014. SD/ - SD/ - [ A. K. GARODIA ] [ S UNIL KUMAR Y ADAV ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 27 TH MAY , 2014 JJ: 2105 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT(A) 4 . CIT 5 . DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ )