Shree Yamuna Pulses, Dahod V. The ACIT.,Cent.Circle-1, Baroda

ITSSA 563/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8598 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-01-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 23-11-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAHUL KUMAR SRDR
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Bad and doubtful debts
• Section: 153A; 132

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH A AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI, A.K.GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(SS)A NO.563-564/AHD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEARS :2003-04 & 2007-08 SHREE YAMUNA PULSES, 5858, CHAKALIA ROAD, DAHOD [ PAN NO. AAGFS 0733A ] V/S . DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA / APPELLANT .. / RESPONDENT) /BY ASSESSEE SHRI SAKAR SHARMA, AR /BY REVENUE SHRI RAHUL KUMAR, SR-DR /DATE OF HEARING 16-01-2013 ! /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 31-01-2013 ' ' ' ' / // / O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THESE ARE TWO APPEALS BY THE SAME ASSESSEE ARE DIR ECTED AGAINST THE COMMON ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS )-IV, AHMEDABAD (CIT(A) FOR SHORT) BOTH DATED 25-10-2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS (AY) 2003-04 & 2007-08. ALL THESE ARE HEARD TOGETHER AN D ARE BEING DISPOSED O BY WAY OF COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. FIRST WE TAKE UP ASSESSEES APPEAL IN IT(SS)A NO.56 3/AHD/2012 FOR A.Y. 03- 04. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE SOLITARY GROUND, WHI CH READS AS UNDER:- 1. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CON FIRMING PENALTY U/S. 271(1)(C) ON SUSTAINED ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEG ED UNACCOUNTED ADVANCES OF RS.55,000/- IT(SS)A NO.563-64/AHD/2012 A.YS. 03-04 & 07-08 SHREE YAMUNA PLUSES V. DCIT CC-1 BRD PAGE 2 3. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE-FIRM IS ENGAGED IN THEE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING AND SELLING OF PLUSES. A SEARCH U/S 132 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS T HE ACT) WAS CARRIED IN THE CASE OF YAMUNA GROUP ON 19-09-2006. ACCORDINGLY, NO TICE U/S. 153A OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED ON 2-03-2007. IN RESPONSE TO THE ASS ESSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME ON 24-08-2007 AT THE INCOME OF RS.5,44,720/- AS AGAINST FOR RS.4,32,230/- RETUNED IN THE ORIGINAL RETURN FILED U/S. 139(1) OF THE ACT. THE ORDER U/S. 143A R.W.S. 133 OF THE ACT WAS PASSED ON 12-12-2008 AT THE ASSET INCOME OF RS.18,19,710/- BY MAKING DISALLOWANCE OF RS.1,36,242/- U/S. 40A(2)(B) OF THE ACT OF THE ADDITION OF RS.55,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED ADVANCES AND DISALLOWANCE OF RS.10,83,745/- ON ACCO UNT OF BAD DEBTS. THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL IN QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS. A GAINST THIS, ASSESSEE FEELING AGGRIEVED BY THIS ORDER FILED APPEAL BEFORE TRIBUNAL AND TRIBUNAL DELETED THE ADDITION IN RESPECT OF BAD DEBTS. HOWEV ER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE LEVY OF PENALTY OF RS.4.50 LAKH IN RESPECT OF ADDITION SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A). AGAINST THIS PENALTY THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A) WHO AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS CONFIR MED THE PENALTY TO THE EXTENT OF RS.55,000/- THEREBY THE APPEAL OF THE ASS ESSEE WAS PARTLY ALLOWED. 4. NOW THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE TRIBU NAL. 5. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT RS.5 5,000/- WAS OFFERED FOR TAX BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE RETURN FILED U/S. 153A O F THE ACT. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE EXPLANATION OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ACC EPTABLE TO THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. HE SUBMITTED THAT ONCE THE EXPLANATION IN GI VEN THE AUTHORITIES BELOW OUGHT TO HAVE ACCEPTED THE SAME. ON THE CONTRARY, L D. SR-DR FOR THE REVENUE STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIE S BELOW. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT BEFORE AUTHORITIE S BELOW, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM THAT THE UNACCOUNTED ADV ANCES WERE GIVEN TO IT(SS)A NO.563-64/AHD/2012 A.YS. 03-04 & 07-08 SHREE YAMUNA PLUSES V. DCIT CC-1 BRD PAGE 3 EMPLOYEE OF THE ASSESSEE-FIRM. IN OUR CONSIDERED OP INION, IT WAS DUTY OF THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE UNACCOUNTED ADVANCES. IN TH IS VIEW OF THE MATTER, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY INTO THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) HENCE, SAME IS HEREBY CONFIRMED. THIS GROUND OF ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. COMING TO ASSESSEES APPEAL IN IT(SS)A NO.564/AHD/2 012 FOR AY 07-08. 8. THE ASSESSEE RAISED IDENTICAL GROUND EXCEPT FIGU RE IN IT(SS)A NO. 563/AHD/2012. THE FACTS IN THE PRESENT CASE ARE THA T IN QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS, HONBLE CO-ORDINATE BENCH HAS PARTLY CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND RESTRICTED THE ADDITION OF RS .2.30 LAKH ONLY ON ACCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT AND PROFIT ELEMENT COMBIN ED TOGETHER. LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT AUTHORITIES BELOW FAILE D TO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THE ADDITION WAS SUSTAINED IN RESPECT OF NET PROFIT AND ADDITION ORIGINALLY MADE WAS REDUCED. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD OFF ERED EXPLANATION THAT WAS NOT ACCEPTABLE TO THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. THER EFORE UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF PRESENT CASE PENALTY WAS NOT JUSTI FIED. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. SR-DR STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF AUTHORITIES B ELOW. HE SUBMITTED THAT ADDITION HAS BEEN SUSTAINED BY THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL , THEREFORE, ASSESSEE GAVE INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME THEREBY CONCE ALED TRUE AND CORRECT FIGURE OF INCOME. 9. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT IN THIS CASE, THE ASSESSING OF FICER HAS MADE VARIOUS ADDITIONS AND UPTO THE STAGE TO THE TRIBUNAL THE AD DITION TO THE EXTENT OF RS.2.30 LAKH WAS SUSTAINED. THE ADDITION SO SUSTAIN ED BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF ITAT WAS IN RESPECT OF THE ADDITION MADE O N THE BASIS OF NET PROFIT @ 5% OF UNACCOUNTED SALE OF RS.22.94 LACS AND 5% ON A CCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT FOR EFFECTING THIS UNACCOUNTED SALES. SI NCE THERE IS NO DISPUTE ABOUT UNACCOUNTED SALES, THERE IS NO AND CANNOT BE ANY BONA FIDE EXPLANATION FROM ASSESSEE FOR THIS UNACCOUNTED SALES ON WHICH A DDITION IS SUSTAINED BY IT(SS)A NO.563-64/AHD/2012 A.YS. 03-04 & 07-08 SHREE YAMUNA PLUSES V. DCIT CC-1 BRD PAGE 4 THE TRIBUNAL AND HENCE, PENALTY IS JUSTIFIED IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE. THIS GROUND OF ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 9. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 10. IN COMBINED RESULT, BOTH APPEALS OF ASSESSEE ARE DI SMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE AT CAPTION PAGE. SD/- SD/- (A.K.GARODIA) (KUL BHARAT) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AHMEDABAD, *DKP #$%- 31/01/2013 +,- . ' ' ' ' //0 //0 //0 //0 10 10 10 10 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. $-$/3 4 / CONCERNED CIT 4. 4- / CIT (A) 5. 0 78 ///3, /3!, +,- / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. 8;< => / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ ' , /TRUE COPY/ ?/+ $ /3!, +,- . STRENGTHEN PREPARATION & DELIVERY O F ORDERS IN THE ITAT 1) DATE OF TAKING DICTATION 18/01 2) DIRECT DICTATION BY MEMBER STRAIGHT ON COMPUTER/LAPTOP/DRAGON DICTATE NO 3) DATE OF TYPING & DRAFT ORDER PLACE BEFORE MEMBER 18/01 4) DATE OF CORRECTION 21/01 5) DATE OF FURTHER CORRECTION 23/01, 24/01 6) DATE OF INITIAL SIGN BY MEMBERS 28/01 7) ORDER UPLOADED ON 31/01 8) ORIGINAL DICTATION PAD-PART HAS BEEN ENCLOSED IN THE FILE YES 9) FINAL ORDER AND 2 ND COPY SEND TO BENCH CLERK ON 31/01