M/s Quark Commerce India Pvt. Ltd., Mohali V. DCIT, Mohali

ITA 714/CHANDI/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 68581 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 25-11-2013
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 14-06-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: J S NAGAR
• Assessee Lawyers: VINEET THAKRAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R.SOOD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.714/CHD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 M/S QUARK COMMERCE VS THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INDIA PVT. LTD., INCOME TAX, # A-45, PH. VIII, CIRCLE 6(1), INDUSTRIAL AREA, MOHALI. MOHALI (PB). PAN : AAECA4873E (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI VINEET THAKRAL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI J.S.NAGAR DATE OF HEARING : 28.11.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28.11.2013 O R D E R PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) CHANDIGARH DATED 22.03.2013 RELATING T O ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09 AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143( 3) OF THE INCOME- TAX ACT, 1961 ( 'THE ACT' FOR SHORT). 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUND OF APPEAL : 1. THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. ASSESSING OFFICER IS TOTALL Y BASED ON CONJECTURES, SURMISES AND PRESUMPTIONS AND IS WITHO UT ANY BASIS OR JUSTIFICATIONS AND WITHOUT ANY NEXUS BETWEEN THE MA TERIAL ON RECORD AND HIS CONCLUSION. 2. THAT THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS WRONGLY, ILLEGAL LY, ARBITRARILY AND WITHOUT ANY BASIS DISALLOWED CURRENT YEAR BUSINESS LOSS OF RS. 42,28,275/- 3. THAT THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS WRONGLY, ILLEGAL LY, ARBITRARILY AND WITHOUT 2 ANY BASIS ADDED RS. 8,46,590/- TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS ADJUSTED AGAINST THE CURRENT YEAR BUSINESS LOSS. 4. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, DELETE OR A MEND GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON OR BEFORE THE DISPOSAL OF THE SAME. 5. ANY OTHER GROUND WHICH MAY BE TAKEN UP AT THE TIME OF HERRING OF APPEAL WITH THE KIND PERMISSION. 3. THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE, AT THE OUTSET POINT ED OUT THAT THE ASSESSMENT IN THE CASE HAS BEEN WRONGLY MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY REJECTING THE BOOK LOSS SHOWN BY THE ASS ESSEE ON THE PREMISE THAT THE BOOKS AND BILLS/VOUCHERS WERE DEST ROYED IN MAJOR FIRE. IT WAS POINTED OUT BY THE LD. AR FOR THE ASS ESSEE THAT THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WERE PRODUCED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER. HOWEVER, IN THE CASE OF SISTER CONCERN M/S QUARK CITY INDIA PVT . LTD. AND F.E. PVT. LTD., THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WERE DESTROYED AND THE P LEA TO THAT EFFECT WAS RAISED. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE CASE OF THE PRESENT ASSESSEE ALSO BY AN ERROR, APPLIED THE SAID FACT AN D RECOMPUTED THE INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE PLACED RELIANCE ON TH E ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE ISSUE ARISING IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS AGAINST THE REJECTION OF BOOK RESULTS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE AND ADOPTION OF THE I NCOME AT NIL AS AGAINST LOSS OF RS. 42,28,275/-. THE PLEA OF THE A SSESSEE BEFORE US WAS THAT THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ALONGWITH ORIGINAL BI LLS/VOUCHERS WERE DULY AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE AND THE SAME WERE PRODUCED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFI CER HAS GIVEN A FINDING THAT THE SAID BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND BILLS/VO UCHERS WERE DESTROYED IN MAJOR FIRE THAT BROKE OUT IN THE PREMI SES OF THE ASSESSEE. ADMITTEDLY, THERE WAS A FIRE IN THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE, IN THAT 3 FIRE, THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE SISTER CONCERNS O F THE ASSESSEE I.E. M/S QUARK CITY INDIA PVT. LTD. AND F.E. PVT. LTD. W ERE DESTROYED. THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE WAS DIRECTED TO PRODUCE BOO KS OF ACCOUNT FOR VERIFICATION BEFORE US AND THE SAME WERE DULY PRODU CED. 6. IN THE ENTIRETY OF THE ABOVESAID FACTS AND CIRCU MSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ADJUDICATION OF THE ISSUE NEED S TO BE CONSIDERED AT THE LEVEL OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ACCORDINGLY, W E REMIT THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO COMPUT E THE INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AFTER VERIFICATION FROM THE B OOKS OF ACCOUNT AND THE BILLS/VOUCHERS WHICH ADMITTEDLY ARE AVAILABLE W ITH THE ASSESSEE, WHO IN TURN IS DIRECTED TO PRODUCE THE SAME BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING SHALL B E AFFORDED TO THE ASSESSEE. 7. IN VIEW OF OUR SETTING ASIDE THE ISSUE BACK TO T HE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER, WE ARE NOT ADDRESSING ISSUES RAI SED ON MERITS OF THE ADDITIONS. IN VIEW THEREOF, THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 TH NOVEMBER,2013. SD/- SD/- ( T.R.SOOD) (SUSHMA CHO WLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUD ICIAL MEMBER DATED: 28 TH NOVEMBER,2013 POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT,CHD.