ACIT, Ambala V. M/s Micro Instruments Company, Ambala Cantt.

ITA 771/CHANDI/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 90083 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-04-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 06-04-2015
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 02-09-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JYOTI KUMARI
• Section: 145

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R.SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 771/CHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 THE ACIT, VS THE MICRO INSTRUMENTS CO., CIRCLE, 8, INDUSTRIAL AREA, AMBALA. AMBALA CANTT. PAN: AAOFM8899H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SMT. JYOTI KUMARI RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUDHIR SEHGAL DATE OF HEARING : 06.04.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08.04.2015 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI,JM THIS APPEAL BY REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDE R OF LD. CIT(APPEALS), PANCHKULA DATED 17.07.2014 FOR ASSESS MENT YEAR 2011-12 CHALLENGING THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 5,14,40,005/- BY REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT UND ER SECTION 145(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THERE IS A CONSISTENT DECLINE IN THE GP RATE SHOWN BY ASSESSEE FROM ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 ONWARDS. DUR ING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03, THE GP RATE OF ASSESSEE WA S 34.04% WHICH HAS FALLEN TO 20.15% DURING THE ASSESSMENT YE AR 2010- 11. THE GP HAS FURTHER DECLINED TO 14.76% DURING T HE YEAR UNDER APPEAL. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS GIVEN COMP ARATIVE 2 CHART OF GP RATE SHOWN FROM ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 TO 2010- 11 AND HAS NOTED THAT NO PLAUSIBLE REASONS HAVE BEE N GIVEN FOR FALL IN GP. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, CONSIDERING HIS TORY OF THE ASSESSEE AND ON IDENTICAL GROUNDS ON WHICH BOOKS WE RE REJECTED UNDER SECTION 145 FROM ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 2-03 TO 2010-11, REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSES SEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO NOTED THAT SIMILAR ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN DELETED BY ITAT, CHANDIGARH BENCH VIDE ORDER IN ITA 129/CHD/2007 DATED 31.07.2008 BUT THE DEPARTMENT IS IN APPEAL BEFORE HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT. THEREFORE, IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN CONSISTENCY, THE IM PUGNED ADDITION WAS MADE. 3. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ADDITION BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS) AND IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT SIMILAR ADDI TION MADE IN EARLIER YEARS ON THE SAME GROUNDS HAD BEEN DELET ED BY LD. CIT(APPEALS) AND THE ITAT CHANDIGARH BENCH ALSO. T HE ISSUE IS, THEREFORE, COVERED IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR A SSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. THE LD. C IT(APPEALS) FOLLOWING HIS OWN ORDER FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 DATED 24.06.2013 DELETED THE ADDITION BY OBSERVING THAT T HE FACTS ARE SAME AND NO NEW FACTS HAVE BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD B Y ASSESSING OFFICER. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ACCORDINGLY, ALLOWED. 4. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, AT THE OUTSET SUBMITTED THAT ITAT CHANDIGARH BENCH IN THE CASE OF THE SAME ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 IN ITA 129/CHD/2007 DAT ED 31.07.2008 DELETED THE SIMILAR ADDITION ON THE IDEN TICAL FACTS. COPY OF THE ORDER IS PLACED ON RECORD. HE HAS ALSO PLACED ON 3 RECORD COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CAS E OF THE SAME ASSESSEE IN ITA 858/CHD/2013 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 10-11 DATED 31.10.2013 IN WHICH DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL HAS B EEN DISMISSED. 5. THE LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE PARTIES STAT ED THAT FACTS ARE IDENTICAL IN ALL THE YEARS. 6. FROM THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF THE E ARLIER ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF THE SAME ASSESSEE, W E DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL. THE FACTS AR E SIMILAR IN ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL AS COMPARED TO THE EAR LIER YEARS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO NOTED THAT ON IDENTICAL GROUNDS, ADDITION IS MADE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AND ADDITION HAS BEEN DELETED BY ITAT IN EARLIER ORDER. THEREFORE, FOR T HE SAKE OF MAINTAINING CONSISTENCY WHEN DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS PENDING IN HON'BLE HIGH COURT, THE IMPUGNED ADDITION WAS MA DE. THE ISSUE IS, THEREFORE, COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSES SEE BY ORDER OF ITAT, CHANDIGARH BENCH AS NOTED ABOVE. IN VIEW OF THE SAME, WE DISMISS DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL. 7. IN THE RESULT, DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 8 TH APRIL, 2015. SD/- SD/- (T.R.SOOD) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 8 TH APRIL,2015. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT CHANDIGARH