GEMCO, Jaipur V. ACIT, Jaipur

ITA 639/JPR/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5425 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 03-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJENDRA SINGH JCIT DHK
• Keywords: Rejection of books of accounts

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 639/JP/2015 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10. M/S. GEMCO, LAL HAWELI, MSB KA RASTA, JOHARI BAZAR, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLE-1, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AACFG 8642 G VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.C. PARWAL, CA JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH, JCIT LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 18/12/2015 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16/02/2016. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A), ALWAR DATED 16.04.2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 AGITATIN G THAT LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN - (I) CONFIRMING THE REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS UNDER SECTION 145(3) OF THE IT ACT.; (II) ENHANCING THE TRADING ADDITION TO RS. 37,04,743/- ON THE DECLARED TURNOVER BY APPLYING GP RATE OF 15% RELYING ON THE ITAT JAIPUR BENCH ORDER IN THE CASE OF ANUJ KUMAR VARSHNEY HOLD ING THAT THE 2 ITA NO. 639/JP/2015 A.Y. 2009-10. M/S. GEMCO VS. ACIT JAIPUR. PURCHASES TO BE UNVERIFIABLE AS AGAINST THE GP RATE OF 11% APPLIED BY THE AO AND GP RATE OF 10.36% DECLARED BY THE ASS ESSEE. THERE BEING NO UNVERIFIABLE PURCHASES, THE ADDITION IS BA D IN LAW. 2. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT T HERE WERE NO UNVERIFIABLE PURCHASES. THEREFORE, THERE WAS NO QUESTION OF REJE CTING THE BOOKS AND HOLDING THE PURCHASES TO BE UNVERIFIABLE. IT IS CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEES GP BEING BETTER THAN THE EARLIER YEARS, NO ADDITION IS CALLED FOR. 2.1. THE LD. D/R ON THE OTHER HAND REFERRED TO THE AOS ORDER WHERE CATEGORICAL FINDING OF FACTS HAVE BEEN GIVEN THAT (I) THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR CURRENT YEAR IS SAME A S IN EARLIER YEARS AND UNVERIFIABLE PURCHASES FROM SIMILAR PARTI ES ARE FOUND IN THIS YEAR ALSO; (II) ITAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2003-04 AND 04-05 HAS REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSE SSEE. THE LD. D/R FURTHER CONTENDED THAT THE ITAT JAIPUR BENCH WHILE DECIDING THE APPEAL IN THE CASE OF ANUJ KUMAR VARSHNEY HAS HELD THAT ADDIT ION @ 15% SHOULD BE APPLIED TO THE UNVERIFIABLE PURCHASES. THE LD. CIT (A) RELYING ON THE ITAT JAIPUR BENCH DECISION ACCORDINGLY MADE THE ADDITION. APART FROM THE ASSE SSEES CONTENTION THAT THERE WERE NO UNVERIFIABLE PURCHASES, LD. COUNSEL HAS NOT DEMO NSTRATED THIS FACT THROUGH ANY COGENT EVIDENCE. 2.2. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE IN THE RE-JOI NDER CONTENDS THAT AGAINST THE ORDER IN THE CASE OF ANUJ KUMAR VARSHNEY PASSED BY THE IT AT JAIPUR BENCH, BOTH THE PARTIES HAVE FILED APPEALS BEFORE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HI GH COURT. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF 3 ITA NO. 639/JP/2015 A.Y. 2009-10. M/S. GEMCO VS. ACIT JAIPUR. JUSTICE, AS IN OTHER CASES, THE ISSUE MAY BE RESTOR ED BACK TO THE FILE OF AO TO DECIDE THE SAME IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AS AND WHEN PASSED. 3. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED T HE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE AO AND LD. CIT (A) HAVE REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE FINDING OF FACT THAT METHOD OF ACCOUNTING IS SIMILAR TO THE EA RLIER YEARS AND THE ITAT JAIPUR BENCH ON THE SAME SET OF FACTS HAVE REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04 AND 04-05. THEREFORE, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN REJECTING THE BOOKS ACCOUNT. 3.1. APROPOS QUANTUM ADDITION, IN THE INTEREST OF J USTICE, WE SET ASIDE THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO DECIDE WHETHER THERE ARE A NY UNVERIFIABLE PURCHASES AND TO ADOPT THE NET PROFIT RATE ON UNVERIFIABLE PURCHASES AS AND WHEN THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT PASS THE JUDGMENT. 4. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16/02/2016 . SD/- VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH (R.P.TOLANI) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 16/02/2016. DAS/ 4 ITA NO. 639/JP/2015 A.Y. 2009-10. M/S. GEMCO VS. ACIT JAIPUR. VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- M/S. GEMCO, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR . 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO.39/JP/2015) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR