M/S. VAILANT GLASS WORKS PVT. LTD, MUMBAI V. THE ITO 4(3)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 917/MUM/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 100818 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 year(s) 6 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 03-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 08-02-2008
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RANDHIR KUMAR GUPTA
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure; Opportunity of being heard; Retrospective amendment; Revised return
• Section: 69C; 80HHC; 133A

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL F BENCH, MUMBAI , , , BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K . BILLAIYA, A CCOUNTANT M EMBER / I .T.A. NO . 917/MUM/2008 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004 - 05 M/S. VALIANT GLASS WORKS PVT. LTD, 384,, M. DABHOLKAR WADI, 5 TH FLOOR, KALBADEVI ROAD, MUMBAI - 400 002 / VS. THE ITO, 4(3)(3), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI - 400 020 ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : ACV 1224E ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY: SHRI AARTI VISSANJI / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RANDHIR KUMAR GUPTA / DATE OF HEARING : 05 . 0 8 .2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19 .0 8 .2015 / O R D E R PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS PREFERRED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - XIV , MUMBAI DT. 20 .1 2 .20 07 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 4 - 0 5 . 2. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY (1) THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OUTSIDE BOOKS AT RS. 20,91,360/ - . ITA. NO . 917/M/2008 2 (2) ADDITION U/S. 69C AT RS. 9,79,200/ - (3) ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF FENTS, BHANGARS AND CHINDIES OF RS. 29,09,456/ - THE ASSESSEE IS FURTHER AGGRIEVED BY NOT ALLOWING THE CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION U/S. 80HHC OF THE ACT. 3. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF PROCESSING PRINTING OF CLOTHES, MANUFACTURING OF MADE - UPS AND TRADING OF CLOTHES. THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED ON 31.10.2004 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS. 2,95,17,060/ - . 3.1. A SURVEY OPERATION U/S. 133A OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED OUT AT THE BUSINESS PREMISES ON 5.1.2006. DURING THE COURSE OF THE SURVEY, VARIOUS INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS WERE FOUND EVIDENCING UNACCOUNTED CASH SALES OF FENTS AND ASH ETC. DO CUMENTS CONTAINING EVIDENCE OF CASH PAYMENTS TOWARDS LABOUR CHARGES NOT RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WERE ALSO FOUND. 3.2. STATEMENTS WERE ALSO RECORDED DURING THE COURSE OF THE SURVEY IN WHICH SHRI DILIP PACHERIWALA, THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE AS SESSEE COMPANY ADMITTED THAT THE SALE OF FENTS/BHANGAR WAS NOT RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS FULLY. HE ALSO ADMITTED THAT EXPENSES ON LABOUR HAD BEEN INCURRED IN CASH WHICH WERE NOT RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THE M.D IN HIS STATEMENT ACCEPTED THE FACT OF PAYMENT IN CASH TO LABOURERS AMOUNTING TO RS. 50,61,046/ - . ACCORDINGLY, THE ORIGINAL RETURN FILED ON 31.10.2004 WAS REVISED ON 29.3.2006 DECLARING INCOME AT RS. 3,32,42,350/ - WHICH INCLUDED THE INCOME OF RS. 50,61,040/ - . 3.3. DURING THE COU RSE OF THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE IMPOUNDED MATERIALS RELATING TO AND RELEVANT TO THE YEAR UNDER ITA. NO . 917/M/2008 3 CONSIDERATION WERE ANALYZED. QUERIES WERE RAISED ACCORDINGLY. ONE OF SUCH QUERY RELATED TO A BLUE COLOUR NOTE BOOK CONTAINING 4 PAGES MARKED A S ANNEXURE - A/10 IN WHICH THERE WAS A MENTION OF 9,09,289.17 METERS. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN WHY IT SHOULD NOT BE PRESUMED THAT STOCK HAS BEEN SOLD OUTSIDE THE BOOKS AND PROFITS ON SUCH SALES SHOULD NOT BE ESTIMATED. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT THE SAID ROUGH BOOK IS MAINTAINED BY THE PERSON AT THE FACT ORY TO FIND THE WHEREABOUTS OF THE STOCK LYING AT VARIOUS PLACES. IT WAS FURTHER EXPLAINED THAT IN THE SAID BOOK, THE CONCERNED PERSON HAS TRIED TO TALLY THE STOCK AND SINCE HE COULD NOT COMPLETE ALL THE DETAILS OF THE INVENTORIES, HE HAS NOT COMPLETED TH E SAID REGISTER TO ARRIVE AT ACTUAL PHYSICAL STOCK. ACCORDINGLY, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE SAID ROUGH BOOK WAS NOT COMPLETE AND THERE WAS NO SHORTAGE OF 9,09,289.17 METRES. THE AO DID NOT ACCEPT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE HOLDING THAT IT IS HARD TO BELIEV E THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO ASCERTAIN THE IDENTITY OF THE PERSON WHO HAS MAINTAINED THE STOCK REGISTER. THE AO FURTHER DID NOT ACCEPT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE SAID REGISTER HAS NO RELEVANCE. ON THE CONTRARY, THE AO WAS OF THE FIRM BELIEF THAT THE STOCK REGISTER HAS BEEN MAINTAINED SCIENTIFICALLY AND SYSTEMATICALLY. 3.4. THE AO FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE QUANTITY RECORDED IN THE IMPOUNDED REGISTER AND THE STOCK AS PER THE REGULAR BOOK IS VERY SMALL AND INSIGNI FICANT AND THEREFORE ENTRIES IN THE SAID REGISTER CANNOT BE BRUSHED ASIDE LIGHTLY. THE AO WAS CONVINCED THAT THE STOCK HAS BEEN SOLD IN CASH AND THE SALE PROCEEDS ARE NOT RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. ACCORDINGLY, THE AO CONSIDERED THE COST AT RS. 11 .50 PER METER ON SALE OF 9,09,289. 17 METERS AND ESTIMATED PROFIT @ 20% I.E. RS. 2.30 PER METER AND MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 20,91,360/ - . ITA. NO . 917/M/2008 4 4. THE ASSESSEE AGITATED THIS ADDITION BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) CLAIMING THAT THE MARKINGS ON THE IMPUGNED REGISTER ARE NOT RELIABLE. IT WAS FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT THE GOODS ARE EXCISABLE GOODS AND NO DISCREPANCIES HAVE BEEN FOUND BY THE EXCISE DEPARTMENT THEREFORE, THERE IS NO QUESTION OF SALES OUTSIDE THE BOOKS. IT WAS POINTED OUT TO THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE STOCK MEN TIONED IN THE ROUGH BOOK WAS NOT THE CORRECT STOCK AND INFACT THE STOCK DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS BOOKS IS HIGHER THAN WHAT HAS BEEN NOTED IN THE SAID REGISTER. THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FIND FAVOUR WITH THE LD. CIT(A) WHO WENT ON TO CONFIRM THE FINDING OF THE AO. 5. BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED WHAT HAS BEEN STATED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. THE LD. COUNSEL DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE PAPER BOOK. DRAWING OUR ATTENTION TO PAGE - 13 9 OF THE PAPER BOOK THE LD. COUNSEL POINTED OUT THAT THE ENTRIES IN THIS PAGE HAVE TO BE READ AND CONSIDERED WITH THE ENTRIES ON PAGE - 138 OF THE PAPER BOOK. DRAWING OUR ATTENTION TO THE ENTRY ON PAGE - 138 WHICH RELATED TO THE TRANSFER OF GOODS TO V - 27 BEI NG 687898.99 METRES . IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT IF THIS IS CONSIDERED AND READ WITH THE ENTRIES ON PAGE - 139, THE SHORTAGE OF 909289.17 HAS TO BE ADJUSTED WITH THE TRANSFER OF GOODS OF 687898.99 AND AT THE MOST THE SHORTAGE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AT 221390.18 M TRS. THE LD. COUNSEL FURTHER STATED THAT THE PROFIT RATE OF 20% ADOPTED BY THE AO IS AGAINST THE FACTS OF THE CASE. DRAWING OUR ATTENTION TO THE COMPARATIVE CHART OF PROFIT SHOWN IN PREVIOUS 5 YEARS, THE LD. COUNSEL STATED THAT THE PROFIT NEVER WERE MOR E THAT 17% AND THE AVERAGE PROFIT COMES TO 14.90. THE LD. COUNSEL REITERATED THE CLAIM THAT THERE IS NO ADVERSE FINDING BY THE EXCISE DEPARTMENT AND THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT THERE WERE SALES OUTSIDE THE BOOKS. THE ITA. NO . 917/M/2008 5 ENTIRE ADDITION S HAVE BEEN MADE MERELY RELYING ON THE NOTINGS IN A ROUGH BOOK THEREFORE THE ADDITION SHOULD BE DELETED. 6. WE HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND WE HAVE CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES BROUGHT ON RECORD BEFORE US. NO DOUBT, THE ENTRIES AS EXHIBITED AT PAGE - 138 AND 139 OF THE PAPER BOOK APPEARS TO BE ENTRIES ON A ROUGH BOOK BUT AT THE SAME TIME THESE ENTRIES CANNOT BE BRUSHED ASIDE LIGHTLY BECAUSE EVERY ENTRY IS FOUND TO BE RECORDED IN THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. MOREOVER, THE TRANSACTIONS WITH THE PARTIES MENTIONED IN THE SHEET HAVE ALSO BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE RESPECTIVE PARTIES. HOWEVER, WE FIND FORCE IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL THAT EXHIBIT - 138 AND 139 HA VE TO BE READ TOGETHER AND THE ENTRIES IN EXHIBIT 138 HAS TO BE CONSIDERED WHILE CONSIDERING THE ENTRIES IN EXHIBIT - 139. THAT BEING SO, SET OFF OF 687898.99 MTRS HAS TO BE GIVEN IN 909289.17 MTRS., RESULTING INTO SHORTAGE OF 221390.18, AT THE MOST THIS HAS TO BE CONSIDERED AS SOLD OUT SIDE THE BOOKS. FURTHER, A PERUSAL OF THE COMPARATIVE CHART SHOW THAT THE AVERAGE PROFIT OF 5 YEARS COMES TO 14.90% THEREFORE THE ADOPTION OF 20% APPEARS TO BE ON THE HIGHER SIDE. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION AND UPON THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE FACT, WE HOLD THAT SHORTAGE OF 221390.18 AT THE MOST CAN BE CONSIDERED AS SOLD OUTSIDE THE BOOKS. THE AO IS DIRECTED TO RECOMPUTE THE PROFIT ON SALE OF THIS STOCK @ 14.90%. TO THIS EXTENT, THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) ARE MODIFIED AND GROUND NO 1 IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 7. THE SECOND ADDITION RELATES TO RS. 9,79,200/ - AS UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE U/S. 69C OF THE ACT. ITA. NO . 917/M/2008 6 8. BEFORE CONSIDERING THIS GROUND LET US FIRST CONSIDER THE THIRD GROUND WHICH RELATES TO THE ADDITION OF RS. 29,09,456/ - ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED SALE OF FEN TS, BHANGARS AND CHINDIES. 8.1. DURING THE COURSE OF THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, REFERRING TO THE ENTRIES IN ANNEXURE - A - 18 RELATING TO CASH GENERATED UPON SALE OF FENTS AND COAL ASH, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN WHY RS. 29,09,456/ - SHOULD N OT BE ADDED ON ACCOUNT OF CASH SALE NOT RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. IN RESPONSE TO THIS QUERY, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS. 50,61,040/ - OFFERED TO TAX IN THE REVISED RETURN INCLUDES THIS ALLEGED SALE OF CHINDIES AND SCRAPS. THE ASSES SEE ALSO GAVE MONTH - WISE BREAK - UP OF SALES WHICH READ AS UNDER: DECEMBER 2003 - RS. 11,36,680/ - JANUARY, 2004 - RS. 12,11,441/ - FEBRUARY. 2004 - RS. 12,36,315/ - MARCH, 2004 - RS. 14,76,610/ - ------------------------ - RS. 50,61,040/ - ============== 8.2. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER CLAIMED THAT THIS CASH SALE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS UTILIZED FOR MAKING PAYMENTS TO LABOURERS AND OTHERS. THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THIS ALLEGED SALE IS INCLUDED IN THE INCOME OFFERED DURING THE SURVEY WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE AO WHO PROCEEDED BY MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 29,09,456/ - . 9. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE REITERATED ITS CLAIM THAT THE ALLEGED CASH SALES IS PART OF THE INCOME SURRENDERED IN THE REVISED RETURN O F INCOME. THE LD. CIT(A) DID NOT ACCEPT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS OF THE FIRM BELIEF THAT THE ASSESSEE MUST HAVE SOLD SCRAP AMOUNTING TO RS. 80 LAKHS WHEREAS THE AO HAS CONFINED HIS ESTIMATION ON THE BASIS OF ITA. NO . 917/M/2008 7 SEIZED M ATERIAL AT RS. 29,09,456/ - ONLY. THE LD. CIT(A) FURTHER OBSERVED THAT INSTEAD OF MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 80 LAKHS, THE AO HAS MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 29,09,456/ - THEREBY ALLOWING SUBSTANTIAL REBATE TO THE ASSESSEE THEREFORE THE AO WAS FULLY JUSTIFIED IN MA KING THE ADDITION OF RS. 29,09,456/ - . 10. AGGRIEVED BY THIS, THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE US. 11. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ONCE AGAIN STATED THAT THE RETURN REVISED BY THE ASSESSEE INCLUDED THIS ALLEGED SALE OF SCRAP AND THEREFORE THE SAME AMOUNT CAN NOT BE ADDED TWICE. 12. THE LD. DR STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE FINDINGS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 13. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL EVIDENCE BROUGHT ON RECORD. QUESTION NO. 32 PUT TO THE MANAGING DIRECTOR DURING THE COURSE OF RECORDING H IS STATEMENT WHICH IS AT PAGE - 7 OF THE PAPER BOOK IS RELEVANT BECAUSE THE MANAGING DIRECTOR WAS SPECIFICALLY ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE CASH SALES OF B HA NGAR , CHINDIES AND ASH WHICH ARE NOT RECORDED IN THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT TO WHICH THE ASSESSEE MADE A SPECIFIC REPLY WHICH READ AS UNDER: WE HAVE BEEN MAKING CASH SALE OF B HA NGAR, CHINDIES AND ASH WHICH ARE BY E - PRODUCTS OF THE MANUFACTURING ACTIVITIES OF VALIANT GLASS WORKS PVT. LTD. (ASSESSEE), THE SAME HAS NEVER BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IN ANY OF THE YEARS SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE PRODUCTION/MANUFACTURING ACTIVIT IES TILL TODAY . ITA. NO . 917/M/2008 8 13.1. QUESTION NO. 34 WHICH READ AS UNDER: WHAT IS THE SOURCE OF THE ABOVE CASH EXPENDITURE? ANS. THE CASH EXPENDITURE MADE TO LABOUR CONTRACTORS WAS OUT OF THE UNACCOUNTED SALE PROCEEDS OF FENTS AS HAS BEEN ADMITTED EARLIER. 13.2. IF THE STATEMENT MADE BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR AT THE TIME OF SURVEY IS CONSIDERED IN THE LIGHT OF THE BUSINESS ACTIVITI ES OF THE ASSESSEE, IT CAN BE SAFELY CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN MAKING SALES OUTSIDE THE BOOKS IN RESPECT OF THE SCRAP GENERATED DURING THE COURSE OF ITS BUSINESS ACTIVITIES. THEREFORE, THE INCOME OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS REVISED RETURN OF INCOME CAN BE ACCEPTED AS HAVING INCLUDED IN THE CASH SALES GENERATED OUT OF THE SCRAP. THEREFORE, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION AND UNDERSTANDING OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN HAND, THE ADDITION OF RS. 29,09,456/ - IS UNJUSTIFIED AS THE SAME IS ALREADY OFFERE D IN THE REVISED RETURN OF INCOME BY THE ASSESSEE. WE, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND DIRECT THE AO TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.29,09,456/ - . GROUND NO. 3 IS ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 14. NOW COMING BACK TO GROUND NO. 2 IN RESPECT O F ADDITION OF RS. 9,77,200/ - MADE U/S. 69C OF THE ACT. 14.1. WHILE ADJUDICATING GROUND NO. 3, WE HAVE REFERRED TO THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE STATEMENT RECORDED AT THE TIME OF SURVEY AND WE HAVE MENTIONED THE ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 34 WHEREIN THE MANAGI NG DIRECTOR HAS SPECIFICALLY SAID THAT THE CASH SALES HAVE BEEN UTILIZED FOR MAKING THE LABOU R PAYMENT AND THEREFORE THE CASH GENERATED OUT OF THE SALE OF SCRAP CAN BE ACCEPTED AS UTILIZED FOR MAKING THE PAYMENT OF RS. 9,77,200/ - AND THEREFORE NO SEPARATE ADDITION IS CALLED FOR. WE, ACCORDINGLY DIRECT THE AO TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS. 9,77,200/ - WHICH IS TREATED AS ITA. NO . 917/M/2008 9 UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE U/S. 69C OF THE ACT. THIS GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO ALLOWED. 15. THE NEXT GRIEVANCE RELATES TO THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80HHC OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF DRAW BACK CREDIT ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE CUSTOMS DUTY. AT THE VERY OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THIS ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE BY THE DE CISION OF THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COUNT IN THE CASE OF AVANI EXPORTS AND OTHERS 348 ITR 391 WHEREIN THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS HELD THAT THE OPERATION OF THE SAID SECTION COULD BE GIVEN EFFECT FROM THE DATE OF AMENDMENT AND NOT IN RESPECT OF EARLIER ASSES SMENT YEARS OF THE ASSESSEES WHOSE EXPORT TURNOVER IS ABOVE RS . 10 CRORES. IN OTHER WORDS, THE RETROSPECTIVE AMENDMENT SHOULD NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO ANY OF THE ASSESSEES. THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FOLLOWED BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY IN 257 CTR 67. R ESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURTS (SUPRA), WE SET ASIDE THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND DIRECT THE AO TO ALLOW THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80HHC OF THE ACT. THIS GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 16. THE NEXT GRIEVANC E OF THE ASSESSEE ONCE AGAIN RELATES TO COMPUTATION OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80HHC OF THE ACT. 17. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT THIS ISSUE IS SETTLED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE IN THE CAS E OF TOPMAN EXPORTS VS CIT 342 ITR 49. WE FIND FORCE IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL. THE AO IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE ISSUE OF COMPUTATION OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80HHC IN THE LIGHT OF THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF TOPM AN EXPORTS (SUPRA). THIS GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO ALLOWED. ITA. NO . 917/M/2008 10 18. THE LAST GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80HHC IN RESPECT OF THE ADDITION. 18.1. SINCE WE HAVE DELETED THE ADDITION MADE U/S. 69C AT RS. 9,77,200 / - AND HAVE ALSO DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 29,09,456/ - , THERE IS NO QUESTION OF ANY COMPUTATION OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80HHC OF THE ACT, ONLY THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED SALE OF STOCK HAVE BEEN MODIFIED BY US. THE AO IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THIS ISSUE A FTER GIVING APPEAL EFFECT TO OUR ORDER AND AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 19. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. OR DER PRONOUNCED IN T HE OPEN COURT ON 19 TH AUGUST , 2015 SD/ - SD/ - - ( VIJAY PAL RAO ) (N.K. BILLAIYA) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 19 TH AUGUST , 2015 . . ./ RJ , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI