ITO, Ward-8(2), Hyderabad V. One More Food Product, Hyderabad

ITA 974/HYD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 97422514 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 08-12-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 11-06-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B KURMI NAIDU
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure; Business expenditure
• Section: 40A(3); 143(3)

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 974HYD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 8(2), HYDERABAD VS. ONE MORE FOOD PRODUCT, HYDERABAD. PAN AAAFO 6118 B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI B. KURMI NAIDU ASSESSEE BY : SHRI A.V. RAGHURAM DATE OF HEARING : 20-11-2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18-12-2015 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M.: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE OR DER OF CIT(A), VIJAYAWADA DATED 21/03/2013, FOR THE 5, FOR THE AY 2008-09. 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE, ASSESSEE A MA NUFACTURER AND SELLER OF TOFFEES AND LOZENGES FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR AY 2008- 09 ON 07/10/2008 ADMITTING INCOME OF RS. NIL. THE C ASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND ASSESSMENT COMPLETED U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT ACT) DETERMINING TOTAL INCOME AT RS. 40,22,278/-. AO MADE THE FOLLOWING DISALLOWANCES AND ADJUSTMENTS : A) INSURANCE AMOUNT RS. 1670/- DISALLOWED AS THE S AME WAS NOT RELATING TO THIS YEAR. B) INTEREST PAID ON VEHICLE LOAN RS. 16,031/- WAS DISALLOWED AS THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE WAS NOT PROVIDED. C) 20% OF GENERATOR MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURE WAS DI SALLOWED AS EXCESSIVE TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 7,516/-. 2 ITA NO. 974 /HYD/2013 ONE MORE FOOD PRODUCT D) LIFE TAX OF RS. 17,192/- ON VEHICLES WAS DISALL OWED AS THE SAME WAS NOT REVENUE IN NATURE. E) ONE OF THE CREDITOR M/S DATA MARKETING HAS NOT SUBMITTED THE CONFIRMATION OF BALANCE, THE AO CONSIDERED ALL THE CREDITORS OUTSTANDING AS UNEXPLAINED EXPENSES. HENCE, ALL TH E CREDITORS OUTSTANDING TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 8,43,741/- WAS AD DED TO INCOME. F) IN RESPECT OF SQUARED OFF ACCOUNTS WHICH ARE PA ID BY CHEQUE BUT NO REPLY WAS SUBMITTED. HENCE, GENUINENESS OF THE SAME WAS NOT PRODUCED, RS. 7,64,081/- AS SUNDRY DEBTORS WERE ADDED BACK TO THE INCOME. G) DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 39,637/- WAS MADE ON ACCOUN T OF 40A(3). H) THE ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION WAS COMPARED WITH T HE TOTAL TURNOVER. IT WAS FOUND THAT EXCESS ELECTRICITY WAS CONSUMED BUT CORRESPONDING GROSS RECEIPTS WERE NOT INCREASED. H ENCE, THE SAME WAS ADDED AS SUPPRESSION OF GROSS RECEIPTS TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 23,32,410/-. 3. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ABOVE ORDER, ASSESSEE PREFERR ED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) HAS PARTLY ALLOWED T HE APPEAL AS EXPLAINED BELOW: A) PAYMENT OF INSURANCE DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED B) INTEREST ON VEHICLE LOAN ALLOWED AS THE EVIDE NCE WAS PRODUCED. C) GENERATOR MAINTENANCE ALLOWED AS THE SAME WAS JUSTIFIED WHILE COMPARING THE SAME WITH PREVIOUS AND SUBSEQU ENT YEARS EXPENDITURE. D) VEHICLE LIFE TAX DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. E) ADDITION OF SUNDRY CREDITORS AS NO CONFIRMATION SUBMITTED PARTLY ALLOWED AS THE AO SENT LETTER OF CONFIRMATI ON ONLY TO M/S BABA MARKETING. THE SAME WAS NOT CONFIRMED BY THE CREDITOR. AS PER CIT(A), AO CAN ONLY DISALLOW RS. 25,792/- R ELATING TO M/S BABA MARKETING. AO CANNOT DISALLOW ALL THE CR EDITORS, AO WAS DIRECTED ACCORDINGLY. F) ADDITION OF SUNDRY DEBTORS AS NO CONFIRMATION S UBMITTED AO DID NOT SEND ANY CONFIRMATION LETTER TO ANY PARTY. AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING ADDITION UNDER THIS HEAD. 3 ITA NO. 974 /HYD/2013 ONE MORE FOOD PRODUCT G) DISALLOWANCE U/S 40A(3) ALLOWED AS THE SAME W AS REFUNDED FOR THE ADVANCE RECEIVED FROM THE CUSTOME R. SINCE IT IS NOT AN EXPENDITURE AND PAYMENT WAS IN THE NATUR E OF REFUND OF ADVANCE. H) AS REGARDS ADDITION OF RS.23,32,410 SUPPRESSION OF TURNOVER DUE TO EXCESS ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION, THE CIT(A) DIRECTED THE AO TO DELETE THE ADDITION BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: THE AO HAS OBSERVED THAT POWER CONSUMPTION DURIN G THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS MORE COMPARED TO YEAR BEFO RE AND YEAR LATER AND ON PARITY WITH POWER CONSUMPTION SUPPRESSION OF GR OSS RECEIPTS WERE WORKED OUT AND SUBJECTED THE IMPUGNED AMOUNT AS SU PPRESSION OF TURNOVER. THE EXPLANATION THAT DURING THE YEAR UND ER REPORT HEATER ROOM WAS USED FOR GRANULIZING OF FINISHED GOODS WAS NOT ACCEPTED. IT WAS ALSO EXPLAINED THAT FLUCTUATIONS IN POWER CHARGES WERE HEAVY DURING THE RELEVANT PERIOD WAS ALSO NOT ACCEPTED BY THE AO, W HICH IS CHALLENGED BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED. POWER FLUCTUATIONS VIS-A-V IS SUPPRESSION OF PRODUCTION IS A VEXED ISSUE. MANY APPELLATE AUTHOR ITIES HAVE STRUCK DOWN SUCH INTERFERENCES BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITIES. I T MAY BE NOTED HERE THAT THE MAIN ARGUMENT OF THE AO IS BASED ON CONSUMPTIO N OF UNIT OF ELECTRICITY VIS-A-VIS PRODUCTION OF TOFFEES. NO DOUBT, CONSUMP TION OF ELECTRICITY WOULD FORM AN IMPORTANT FACTOR IN THE IMPUGNED MANUFACTU RING PROCESS, BUT SUPPRESSION SOLELY BASED ON CONSUMPTION OF ELECTRI CITY, WITHOUT TAKING THE EXPLANATION OF THE APPELLANT THAT HEATER ROOM HAS BEEN USED EXTENSIVELY DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AND IN TRIAL A ND ERROR PROCESS IN ADJUSTMENTS THAT TOOK PLACE, MORE CONSUMPTION OF ELECTRICITY TOOK PLACE IS PLAUSIBLE. IN ADDITION, IT IS ALSO SEEN THAT THE A O HAS NOT FOUND ANY SALES OUTSIDE THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES , I AM INCLINED TO AGREE WITH THE APPELLANT THAT THE CONSUMPTION OF ELECTRI CITY AND OTHER ITEMS LIKE GAS AND DIESEL WOULD DEPEND ON A NUMBER OF FACTORS LIKE QUALITY OF TOFFEES & FLAVOR, SHADE, COLOR ETC HAVE TO BE TAKEN INTO A CCOUNT AND ALSO THAT POWER CONSUMPTION IN NONPRODUCTIVE ACTIVITIES HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED, HAS A POINT TO TAKE NOTE OF. THESE FACTORS HAVE PROBAB LY NOT BEEN APPRECIATED BY THE AO, WHO HAS SIMPLY WORKED OUT SUPPRESSION O F PRODUCTION ON THE BASIS OF ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION. IT IS ALSO A FAC T THAT THE COURTS HAVE VERY CLEARLY HELD THAT UNRELIABILITY, INCORRECTNESS AND INCOMPLETENESS OF ACCOUNTS HAS TO BE SHOWN BY THE DEPARTMENT BEFORE REJECTING THE BOOK RESULTS AND STRONG AND SUFFICIENT REASONS MUST BE GIVEN TO INDICATE THAT THE ACCOUNTS WERE UNRELIABLE AND THE MERE FACT THAT TH ERE WAS A DISPARITY IN CONSUMPTION OF ELECTRICITY WOULD NOT JUSTIFY THE R EJECTION OF BOOK RESULTS BECAUSE SUCH VARIATIONS COULD BE DUE TO VARIOUS OT HER FACTORS BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE APPELLANT. FURTHER, THE AO HAS NO W HERE DOUBTED THE CONSUMPTION OF OTHER MATERIALS LIKE, FLAVORS', COL OR & CHEMICALS, LABOR CHARGES ETC. WHICH WOULD BE THE MOST IMPORTANT CRI TERIA FOR WORKING OUT THE SUPPRESSION OF GROSS RECEIPTS. TAKING THE ENTIRETY OF FACTS OF THE CASE INTO ACCOUNT, I AM OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ACTI ON OF THE AO IN MAKING GP ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSION OF PRODUCTIO N IS NOT IN ORDER AND ACCORDINGLY, HE IS DIRECTED TO DELETE THE SAME. 4. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDER OF CIT(A), REVENUE IS I N APPEAL BEFORE US AND RAISING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED BOTH ON FACTS AND LAW 4 ITA NO. 974 /HYD/2013 ONE MORE FOOD PRODUCT 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING. THE ADDIT ION MADE UNDER THE HEAD GENERATOR MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURE ON THE GRO UND THAT MORE THE NUMBER OF POWER CUTS, MORE USAGE OF GENERATOR WAS PLAUSIBLE IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AS THE ADDITION WAS BASED ON THE SELF- MADE VOUCHERS. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN RESTRICTING THE ADD ITION MADE BY THE AO IN THE ABSENCE OF CONFIRMATION LETTERS ADDRESSED B Y THE AO TO THE REMAINING 15 CREDITORS THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT PROVED THE SOURCES OF CREDIT AS GENUINE ALONG WITH IDENTITY PROOF. 4. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAD ERRED IN MENTIONING THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IN RESPECT OF SUNDRY DEBTORS IS INCORREC T IN THE ABSENCE OF LETTERS ADDRESSED TO THE PARTIES FOR CONFIRMATION OF BALANCES. 5. THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT NOT HAVE ADMITTED FRES H EVIDENCES WHICH WERE NOT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO AS THE ASSE SSEE WAS IN POSSESSION OF THE MATERIAL EVEN AT THE TIME OF ASS ESSMENT AND ALSO GOT OPPORTUNITY AT THE TIME -OF THE SCRUTINY PROCEEDIN GS W.R.T. THE DISALLOWANCE MADE U/S. 40A(3). 6. THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FINDINGS OF THE AO ON ARRIVING AT A TURNOVER PROPORTIONATE TO CONSUMED E LECTRICITY. 5. AS REGARDS GROUND NO. 2, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED TH AT CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE ON GENERATOR MAINTENA NCE EXPENDITURE AS THE SAME WAS BASED ON THE SELF-MADE VOUCHERS. 6. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE VOU CHERS ARE GENUINE. 7. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSING THE RECORDS AS WELL AS THE ORDERS OF REVENUE AUTHORITIES, IT WAS NOTICE D THAT THE AO HAD DISALLOWED 20% OF EXPENDITURE ON ADHOC BASIS FOR TH E REASON THAT THE VOUCHERS WERE HAND-MADE. WE DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE A DOPTION OF 20% DISALLOWANCE WHEN THE VOUCHERS ARE NOT GENUINE. AS LONG AS THE EXPENDITURE WAS INCURRED FOR THE BUSINESS AND FOR T HE CURRENT PERIOD THE SAME IS ALLOWED AS EXPENDITURE. THE ASSESSEE HA D ALSO INCURRED SIMILAR EXPENDITURE IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR AT RS. 166 ,692. SINCE THE ASSESSEE IS IN MANUFACTURING BUSINESS AND HAVING PL ANT & MACHINERY, IT IS BOUND TO INCUR SUCH EXPENDITURE. HENCE, IT IS ALLOWED AS BUSINESS EXPENDITURE. ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 8. AS REGARDS GROUND NO. 3, LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT T HE CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE ON SUNDRY CREDITORS A S THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT PROVED THE SOURCE OF CREDIT AS GENUINE ALONG WI TH THE IDENTITY 5 ITA NO. 974 /HYD/2013 ONE MORE FOOD PRODUCT PROOF. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE CONFIRMATIONS WERE SUBMITTED BUT THE AO HAD NOT CONSIDERED THE SA ME AND ALSO PROPER OPPORTUNITY WAS NOT GIVEN TO EXPLAIN THE TRA NSACTIONS INVOLVED. 9. IT IS OBSERVED THAT AO SHOULD HAVE ISSUED LETTER S TO ALL THE SUNDRY CREDITORS INSTEAD OF SENDING A NOTICE TO ONL Y ONE CREDITOR ON SELECTIVE BASIS. DUE TO THE FAILURE OF ONE CREDITOR , AO CANNOT LET TO FORM OPINION THAT THE OTHER CREDITORS ARE NOT GENU INE. WE AGREE WITH THE FINDINGS OF CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, WE DISMISS THI S GROUND. 10. AS REGARDS GROUND NO. 4, LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE IN RESPECT OF SUNDRY DEBTORS AS THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT SUBMITTED THE CONFIRMATION OF BALA NCES. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE FILE D CONFIRMATIONS. 11. SIMILAR TO THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE CIT(A) IN GR OUND NO.3, THE AO MUST HAVE ISSUED CONFIRMATION LETTERS BEFORE ARRIVI NG AT THE DECISION THAT THESE ARE UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE U/S 69C. IN THE ABSENCE OF PROPER ENQUIRY, WE AGREE WITH THE CIT(A) IN DELETIN G THIS ADDITION. THUS, THIS GROUND OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 12. AS REGARDS GROUND NO. 5, LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN ALLOWING FRESH EVIDENCE RELATING TO DISALLOWANCE MADE U/S 40A(3). ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THESE PAYM ENTS ARE NOT RELATING TO EXPENSES AND SHOULD NOT HAVE DISALLOWED . 13. WITH REGARD TO THE DISALLOWANCE MADE U/S 40A(3) , WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT CIT(A) HAS POWER TO ENTERTAIN FRESH EVIDE NCE, IT WAS HELD IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. GOKULDAS AND CO. [2002] 253 ITR 663(RAJ.) THAT WHERE THERE IS MATERIAL EVIDENCE BEFORE THE AO TO S UPPORT THE ASSESSEES CLAIM, SUCH CLAIM EVEN IF NOT RAISED BEF ORE THE AO, BUT IF RAISED BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, IT OUG HT TO BE CONSIDERED AND DECIDED BY THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY, IF IT IS SA TISFIED ABOUT THE BONAFIDES. IN EACH CASE, IT HAS TO DECIDE BASED ON THE FACTS OF ITS OWN 6 ITA NO. 974 /HYD/2013 ONE MORE FOOD PRODUCT TO ENTERTAIN OR NOT TO ENTERTAIN. HENCE, CONSIDERIN G THE ABOVE JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENT, THIS GROUND IS DISMISSED. 14. AS REGARDS GROUND NO.6, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED TH AT THE CIT(A) HAD FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FINDINGS OF AO RELATIN G TO EXCESS ELECTRICITY BILL CONSUMPTION VIS--VIS THE PROPORTI ONATE TURNOVER, WHICH WAS SUPPRESSED TO BRING TO THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. 15. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT TH E AMOUNT DISALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE BASIS OF WRONGLY ARRIVED CONCLUSIONS THAT BY PAYING EXCESS ELECTRICITY CHARG ES TO THE APCPDCL OF RS. 6,869/- OVER THE PREVIOUS YEAR AND R S. L7,674/- OVER THE PRECEDING YEAR, THE ASSESSEE HAD SUPPRESSED AN ASSUMED TURNOVER OF RS.23,32,410/- WHICH IS ABSOLUTELY WRON G. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSING OFFICER HAD FAILED TO RECOGNIZE THAT INCURRING ELECTRICITY CHARGES IN EXCESS OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR OR NEXT YEAR WILL NOT RESULT IN EXCESS TURN-OVER. HE SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSING OFFIC ER HAD UNJUDICIOUSLY HAD ADDED ABOVE 50% OF THE TURNOVER O F THE ASSESSEE AS INCOME. IT WAS EXPLAINED DURING THE COURSE OF AS SESSMENT THAT THE USING HEATER ROOM FOR MORE TIME HAD RESULTED IN THE EXCESS CONSUMPTION OF ELECTRICITY. ALSO IT WAS EXPLAINED T HAT THE CONSUMPTION OF ELECTRICITY DEPENDS ON THE VARIETY OF PRODUCTS, PRODUCTION SCHEDULE, AND POWER-CUTS IN BETWEEN ETC. ALSO ELECTRICITY CON SUMPTION DURING THE YEAR UNDER SCRUTINY WAS MORE DUE TO THE FACT TH AT DURING THE YEAR HEATER ROOM FOR GRANULIZING OF FINISHED GOODS WAS U SED CONTINUOUSLY. SUBSEQUENTLY TIMING OF THE HEATING WAS REDUCED SUBS TANTIALLY. THIS HEATING PROCESS HAD ADDED TO THE EXCESS CONSUMPTION OF ELECTRICITY DURING THE ASST. YEAR 2008-09. IT WORKS OUT TO ADDI TIONAL CONSUMPTION OF POWER TO THE EXTENT OF 1,20,000/- FOR THE YEAR C OMPARED TO THE PRODUCTION VALUE OF THE PREVIOUS AND NEXT YEAR: WHI CH IS RS. 10,000/- PER MONTH AND RS. 400/- PER DAY. POWER SURGES, FLUC TUATIONS AND SHUT-DOWN ALSO CAUSE THIS MUCH VARIANCE ON THE CONT INUOUS PROCESSING INDUSTRY. TAKING THIS AS SUPPRESSION OF PRODUCTS IS NOT CORRECT AND IS NOT FAIR TO ARBITRARILY COMING TO TH E CONCLUSION AND 7 ITA NO. 974 /HYD/2013 ONE MORE FOOD PRODUCT ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 23,22,410/- I.E. ABOU T 50% OF THE TURNOVER. 15.1 LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT EVEN IF IT WERE TO BE AS SUMED THAT THE PRODUCTION WAS SUPPRESSED BY USING MORE ELECTRICITY , PRODUCTION OF CONFECTIONERY DEPENDS NOT ONLY ELECTRICITY BUT ALSO RAW MATERIALS LIKE SUGAR, LIQUID GLUCOSE, IN HUGE QUANTITIES TO PRODUC E THE VOLUME OF QUANTITY TO RECORD THE TURNOVER ALLEGEDLY SUPPRESSE D BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSING OFFICER COULD NOT PR OVE BY ANY CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE OF PURCHASE OF SUCH HUGE QUA NTITY OF RAW MATERIAL AND SALE OF FINISHED GOODS WITHOUT RECORDI NG IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD MADE WILD IMAGI NATION IN ARRIVING THE HUGE TURNOVER. ALSO EVEN IF IT WERE TO BE THE CASE, TOTAL TURNOVER ALLEGEDLY SUPPRESSED BY THE ASSESSEE CANNO T BE CONSIDERED AS INCOME IN TOTAL UNDER ANY STRETCH OF IMAGINATION . THUS THE .LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER'S TREATING THE IMAGINED PRODUCTIO N AS INCOME IS NOT JUSTIFIED AND NOT TENABLE. 16. CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE SIDES A ND MATERIAL FACTS ON RECORD, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT AO HAD ADO PTED THE METHOD OF CALCULATION FOR ARRIVING ON SUPPRESSION OF REVEN UE CONSIDERING THE EXCESS CONSUMPTION OF ELECTRICITY COMPARED TO PREVI OUS YEAR AND FOLLOWING YEAR. THE CALCULATION OF SUPPRESSION OF R EVENUE IS ONLY BASED ON ELECTRICITY. IN REALITY THE GENERATION OF REVENUE DEPENDS UPON SO MANY FACTORS, LIKE, PURCHASE OF RAW MATERIA L, LABOUR, ELECTRICITY, TRANSPORT MANAGEMENT ETC. ALL THESE FA CTORS CAN BE ANALYSED TO FIND OUT THE REVENUE GENERATION DURING THE PERIOD. THE ELECTRICITY IS ONE OF THE FACTORS AND CANNOT BE REL IED UPON TO GIVE ACCURATE INFORMATION ON REVENUE GENERATION. MOREOVE R, NO OTHER EVIDENCE WERE BROUGHT ON THE RECORD TO SHOW THAT TH E ASSESSEE HAD GENERATED EXCESS REVENUE OR SUPPRESSED ANY REVENUE IN THE BOOKS. IN ABSENCE OF ANY COGENT EVIDENCE, WE FIND IT APPRO PRIATE TO FOLLOW THE FINDINGS OF CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE GROUND RAISE D BY THE REVENUE. 8 ITA NO. 974 /HYD/2013 ONE MORE FOOD PRODUCT 17. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISS ED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18 TH DECEMBER, 2015. SD/- SD/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER A CCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 18 TH DECEMBER, 2015 KV COPY TO:- 1) ITO, WARD 8(2) ,8 TH FLOOR, D-BLOCK, IT TOWERS, AC GUARDS,HYDERABAD. 2) M/S ONE MORE FOOD, PLOT NO. 43, BANDLAGUDA INDUS TRIAL ESTATE, RAJENDERNAGAR, R. R. DISTRICT. 3 CIT(A), VIJAYAWADA 4) CIT-II, HYDERABAD 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., H YDERABAD.