M/S BOMBAY HARDWARE P LTD, CHENNAI V. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1 (2), CHENNAI

ITA 743/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4763 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-08-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 01-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V M MAHIDAR
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , ! ' # , % #& BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.743/CHNY/2018 ) *) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 M/S BOMBAY HARDWARE PVT. LTD., NO.32, SEMBUDOSS STREET, GEORGE TOWN, CHENNAI - 600 001. PAN : AAACB 2823 P V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(2), CHENNAI. (,-/ APPELLANT) (./,-/ RESPONDENT) ,- 0 1 / APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE ./,- 0 1 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI V.M. MAHIDAR, JCIT 2 0 3% / DATE OF HEARING : 05.08.2019 45* 0 3% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08.08.2019 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -3, CHENNA I, DATED 30.11.2017 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS ADDIT ION OF 5,81,835/-. 2 I.T.A. NO.743/CHNY/18 3. SHRI S. SRIDHAR, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE , SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND SALES TO THE EXTEN T OF 31,42,30,525/- ON VERIFICATION OF UNIT-WISE SALES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO FOUND ON VERIFICATION OF BREAK-UP OF THE ACTUAL SALES AT 31,48,12,360/-. THEREFORE, ACCORDING TO THE LD. CO UNSEL, THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT THE SALE WAS REDUCED T O THE EXTENT OF 5,81,835/-. THE ASSESSEE FILED RECONCILIATION STAT EMENT BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE CIT(APPEALS). THE CIT(APPEALS), HOWEVER, ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, HAS NOT CONS IDERED THE RECONCILIATION STATEMENT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HEARD SHRI V.M. MAHIDAR, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ALSO. ON PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF T HE CIT(APPEALS), IT APPEARS THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS NOT RE-APPRECI ATED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS SIMPLY R ECORDED A STATEMENT THAT SINCE IT IS A FACTUAL FINDING OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, HE IS NOT INCLINED TO INTERFERE WITH THE REASONING OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINIO N THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS TO RE-APPRECIATE THE MATERIAL AVAI LABLE ON RECORD INCLUDING THE RECONCILIATION STATEMENT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE POWER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) UNDER THE SCHEME OF INCOM E-TAX ACT IS 3 I.T.A. NO.743/CHNY/18 VERY SIGNIFICANT. IN OTHER WORDS, THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS THE POWER COTERMINOUS AS THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. MORE OVER, HE IS CONFERRED WITH THE POWER OF ENHANCING THE ASSESSMEN T. MOREOVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DECIDED ON FACTUAL ASPECT . THIS DOES NOT EMPOWER THE CIT(APPEALS) TO DISOWN HIS RESPONSIBILI TY CAST UPON HIM UNDER THE SCHEME OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT. 5. THE CIT(APPEALS) IS EXPECTED TO RE-APPRECIATE TH E FACTS AVAILABLE ON RECORD ONCE AGAIN TO RECORD HIS OWN FI NDING ON MERIT IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. IN THIS CASE, THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS NOT RE- APPRECIATED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND TH E FACTS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONS IDERED OPINION THAT THE MATTER NEEDS TO BE RE-EXAMINED BY THE CIT(APPEA LS). ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) IS SET A SIDE AND THE ENTIRE ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS REMITTED BAC K TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(APPEALS). THE CIT(APPEALS) SHALL RECONSIDER TH E FACTS AND MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND BRING ON RECORD HO W THE DIFFERENCE OCCURRED, AFTER CONSIDERING THE RECONCILIATION STAT EMENT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. NEEDLESS TO STATE THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) SHALL GIVE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGL Y, THE ORDER OF THE 4 I.T.A. NO.743/CHNY/18 CIT(APPEALS) IS SET ASIDE AND THE ENTIRE ISSUE IS R EMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(APPEALS). 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 8 TH AUGUST, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ! ' # ) ( . . . ) (INTURI RAMA RAO) (N.R.S. GANESAN) % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 7 /DATED, THE 8 TH AUGUST, 2019. KRI. 0 .389 :9*3 /COPY TO: 1. ,- /APPELLANT 2. ./,- /RESPONDENT 3. 2 ;3 () /CIT(A)-3, CHENNAI 4. PRINCIPAL CIT- 1, CHENNAI 5. 9< .3 /DR 6. =) > /GF.