ITO, Jaipur V. ANIL KUMAR DANGAYACH,HUF, Jaipur

ITA 652/JPR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 99517 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 24-09-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: O P BHATEJA
• 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, JAIPUR JH VH-VKJ-EHUK] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH YFYR DQEKJ] U;KF; D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI T.R.MEENA, AM & SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 652/JP/2014 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(2), JAIPUR. CUKE VS. ANIL KUMAR DANGAYACH, HUF, D-49, HATHI BABU MARG, BANIPARK, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AACHA 0340 R VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RE SPONDENT IZR;K{KSI.K @ C.O. NO. 31/JP/2014 (ARISING OUT OF VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 652/JP/2014) FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 ANIL KUMAR DANGAYACH, HUF, D- 49, HATHI BABU MARG, BANIPARK, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(2), JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA- @ PAN/GIR NO.: AACHA 0340 R IZR;K{KSID @ OBJECTOR IZR;FKHZ @ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI O.P. BHATEJA (ADDL.CIT) FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PRAVEEN SARASWAT (CA) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 20/11/2015 MN?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27/11/2015 ITA 652/JP/2014 & CO 31/JP/2014_ ITO VS. ANIL KUMAR DANGAYACH 2 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: T.R. MEENA, A.M.: THE APPEAL BY REVENUE AND CROSS OBJECTION BY ASSESS EE ARISE FROM THE ORDER DATED 08/07/2014 OF LD. CIT (A)-I, JAIPUR. RESPECTIVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AS WELL AS C.O. ARE AS UNDER:- GROUNDS IN REVENUE APPEAL. 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN RESTRICTIN G THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O. OF RS. 50,14,497/- TO RS. 5,20,655/- EVEN AFTER CONFIRMING THE REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HONBLE ITAT JAIPUR IN THE CASE OF M/S TRIDENT JEWELLERS (ITA NO. 552/JP/2013) ORDER DATED 10/07/2013. GROUNDS IN CROSS OBJECTION 1. THE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN SUSTAINING TRADING AD DITION OF RS. 5,20,655/- BY APPLYING G.P. RATE @ 6% INSTEAD OF 5.05% DECLARED BY ASSESSEE, WHILE IN IMMEDIATE PRECEDING YEAR IT WAS 5.25% ESTIMATED. 2. THE LD. DR IS HEARD WHO RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF TH E LOWER AUTHORITIES. 3. LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ISSUE UNDER CONSIDERATION ITA 652/JP/2014 & CO 31/JP/2014_ ITO VS. ANIL KUMAR DANGAYACH 3 RELATES TO TAXABILITY OF UNVERIFIABLE PURCHASES OF PRECIOUS AND SEMI PRECIOUS STONES USED IN JEWELLERY MANUFACTURING. THE COORDINATE BENCH OF ITAT IN A BUNCH OF APPEALS, ON SIMILAR ISSUE, BY CONSOLIDATED ORDER IN THE CASE OF ANUJ KUMAR VARSHNEY & OTHERS VS. ITO (I TA NO. 187/JP/2012 DATED 22-10-2014) HAS HELD THAT 15% OF UNVERIFIABLE PURCHASES SHALL BE HELD TO BE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES IN THE RELEVANT YEARS. IT IS ALSO BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE TH AT BOTH REVENUE AND ASSESSEE HAVE GONE IN APPEAL BEFORE HONBLE RAJASTH AN HIGH COURT AGAINST THIS BUNCH OF ORDERS. IN SIMILAR CASES, TO AVOID MULTIPLICITY OF APPEALS, THIS BENCH HAS SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ISSU ES RAISED IN SUCH APPEALS, TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO DECIDE THE SAME A FRESH AFTER THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN THE CAS E OF ANUJ KUMAR VARSHNEY & OTHERS (SUPRA) IS DELIVERED. THEREFORE, FOLLOWING OUR EARLIER ORDERS ON THE SAME LINES, THE ISSUE RAISED IN SUBJE CT APPEAL IS ALSO ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO DECI DE AFRESH AFTER THE DECISION OF HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN CASE OF ANUJ KUMAR VARSHNEY & OTHERS VS. ITO (SUPRA) AFTER GIVING ADEQUATE OPPO RTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE PARTIES. THUS THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA 652/JP/2014 & CO 31/JP/2014_ ITO VS. ANIL KUMAR DANGAYACH 4 5. THE GROUND RAISED IN THE ASSESSEES C.O. WILL ALSO BE AFFECTED BY THE OUTCOME OF SUCH DECISION. IN VIEW THEREOF, THE R EVENUES AS WELL AS ASSESSEES C.O. GROUNDS ARE ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE T O THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER, 6. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEAL AS WELL AS THE C. O. OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27/11/2015. SD/- SD/- YFYR DQEKJ VH-VKJ-EHUK (LALIET KUMAR) (T.R. MEENA) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 27 TH NOVEMBER, 2015 * RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- THE ITO, WARD 3(2), JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- SHRI ANIL KUMAR DANGAYACH HUF, JAIPU R. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 652/JP/2014 & CO 31/JP/2014) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR