REMI FANS LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO 9(3)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 7620/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 100997 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-09-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 10-09-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 27-12-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MISHRA

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.BASKARAN , AM AND AMARJIT SINGH , JM ./ I.T.A. NO . 7620 / MUM/20 1 3 ( / ASSESSMENT YEA R : 20 10 - 11 ) REMI FANS LTD., PLOT NO.11, CAMA INDUSTRIAL ESTATES, WALBHAT ROAD, GOREGAON (E), MUMBAI - 400063 / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER 9(3)(4), 2 ND FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M K ROAD, MUMBAI - 400020 ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) ./ ./PAN. : AACCR0163L / APPELLANT S BY SHRI S L JAIN / R EVENUE BY SHRI S K MISHRA / DATE OF HEARING : 1 0 .9 . 201 5 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 10. 9. 201 5 / O R D E R P ER B R BASKARAN, AM : THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL CHALLENGING THE ORDER DATED 14.10.2013 PASSED BY LD CIT(A) - 20, MUMBAI AND IT RELATES TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF LD CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF PURCHASES TO THE EXTENT OF RS.3,78,390/ - . 2. THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURE AND SALE OF ELECTRICAL FANS. THE SALES TAX DEPARTMENT, MUMBAI PUBLISHED A LIST OF PERSONS WHO ARE INDULGING IN PRO VIDING ACCOMMODATION BILLS. THE AO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED GOODS WORTH RS.4,21,758/ - FROM TWO PERSONS NAMED M/S RUSHAB H ENTERPRISES AND M/S RIDDHI SIDDHI ITA NO. 7620 / MUM/20 1 3 2 CORPORATION. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IT IS DIFFICULT TO ESTABLISH GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTIONS. ACCORDINGLY, THE AO DISALLOWED THE ABOVE SAID AMOUNT OF RS.4,21,758/ - . BEFORE THE LD . CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ACTUAL AMOUNT DEBITED TO PURCHASES ACCOUNT WAS ONLY RS.3,78,390/ - . ACCORDINGLY, THE LD CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE DISALLO WANCE TO THAT EXTENT. 3. THE LD A.R SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO THAT IT COULD NOT ESTABLISH GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS IN THE CONTEXT THAT IT COULD NOT PRODUCE THE CONCERNED PARTIES OR OBTAIN CONFIRMATION LETTERS FR OM THEM. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED COPIES OF PURCHASE BILLS, THE GOODS RECEIVED NOTE PREPARED BY THE STORES PEOPLE UPON RECEIPT OF GOODS. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID THE AMOUNT BY WAY OF CHEQUES AND THEY HAVE BEEN DULY ENCASHED BY THE RELEVANT SUPPLIERS. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD A.R SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PROVED THE GENUINENESS OF PURCHASES AND HENCE THE LD CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE. HE FURTHER PLACED RELIANCE ON THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS RENDERED B Y THE CO - ORDINATE BENCH OF TRIBUNAL, WHEREIN IDENTICAL ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION PROVIDED BY SALES TAX DEPARTMENT WERE DELETED: - (A) ACIT VS. SHRI RAMILA PRAVIN SINGH (ITA NO.5246/MUM/2013 DT. 5.3.2015) (B) ITO VS. SHRI DEEPAK POPATLAL GALA ( I TA NO.5920 & 6203/MUM/2013 DATED 27.3.2015) THE LD A.R FURTHER PLACED RELIANCE ON THE DECISION RENDERED BY THE JURISDICTIONAL BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF BABULAL C BORANA VS. ITO (282 ITR 251), WHEREIN THE ADDITION OF P URCHASES MADE ON THE BASIS OF THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY THIRD PARTY WAS DELETED. ITA NO. 7620 / MUM/20 1 3 3 4. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD D.R SUBMITTED THAT THE FACT THAT THE SUPPLIERS ARE THE PERSONS PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION BILLS HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED BY THE SALES TAX DEPARTMENT. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE GOODS RECEIVED NOTE IS AN INTERNAL DOCUMENT PREPARED BY THE ASSESSEE ITSELF AND HENCE THE SAME SHALL NOT PROVE THE RECEIPT OF GOODS. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD D.R SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO PROVE THE RECEIPT OF GOODS . 5. IN THE REJOINDER, THE LD A.R SUBMITTED THAT THE GOODS PURCHASED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE ABOVE SAID PARTIES ARE SMALL IN VOLUME AND HENCE IT DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY TRUCK. 6. WE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD. WE NOTICE THAT THE AS SESSING OFFICER HAS MADE THE ADDITION SOLELY ON THE REASONING THAT THE ASSESSEE ITSELF HAS ACCEPTED THAT THE TRANSACTIONS ARE NOT GENUINE, SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED IN THE LETTER DATED 08 - 02 - 2013 THAT IT IS DIFFICULT TO ESTABLISH THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. THUS, IT IS SEEN THAT THE AO DID NOT EXAMINE THE CONTENTIONS NOW RAISED BEFORE US, AS HE WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ACCEPTED THAT THE PURCHASES ARE NOT GENUINE. THE LD CIT(A) HAS ALSO TAKEN NOTE OF THE ABOVE SAID FACT. 7. S INCE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT EXAMINED THE RECORDS/DOCUMENTS MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE AND SINCE HE HAS NOT EXPRESSED ANY OPINION THEREON, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE CONTENTIONS URGED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE DOCUMENTS FURNISHED BEFORE US SHOULD BE E XAMINED BY THE AO. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND RESTORE THE SAME TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH EXAMINATION. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO FURNISH RELEVANT DOCUMENT BEFORE THE AO TO ENABLE HIM TO VERIFY THEM AND ASSESS THE TRUE FACTUAL AND LEGAL POSITION. ITA NO. 7620 / MUM/20 1 3 4 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED ACCORDINGLY ON 10TH SEPT, 2015. 10TH SEPT , 2015 SD SD ( AMARJIT SINGH ) ( B.R. BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI: 10TH SEPT , 2015 . . . ./ SRL , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - CONCERNED 4. / CIT CONCERNED 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI CONCERNED 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , /ITAT, MUMBAI