IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R. SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. NOS.51 & 52 /CHD/2013 (IN ITA NOS.912 & 913 /CHD/2012) (ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2008-09 & 2009-10) THE A.C.I.T., VS. M/S SUKHNA AUTOMOBILES PETROL PUMP, CIRCLE 4(1) SECTOR 28C, CHANDIGARH. CHANDIGARH. PAN: AANFS2336L (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI J.S.NAGAR, DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI JASPAL SHARMA DATE OF HEARING : 29.11.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23.12.2013 O R D E R PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM: THE APPLICANT HAS FILED THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICAT ION FOR RECALLING THE ORDER DATED 27.11.2013 IN ITA NOS.912 & 913/CHD/2012 RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09 AND 2009-1 0. 2. THE APPLICANT REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN HOLDING OF THE EVAPORATION LOSS OF 1% IN THE ACCOUN T OF BOTH THE PETROL AND DIESEL WAS REASONABLE THOUGH THE APPLICANT ITSE LF HAD CLAIMED EVAPORATION LOSS OF ONLY 0.39% IN THE ACCOUNT OF TH E DIESEL. 2 3. THE LEARNED D.R. FOR THE REVENUE POINTED OUT THA T WHILE DECIDING THE ISSUE VIDE PARA 9 THE TRIBUNAL HAD OBSERVED THA T IN THE EARLIER ORDER THE TRIBUNAL HAD HELD THE EVAPORATION LOSS AT 1% IN THE ACCOUNT OF BOTH THE PETROL AND DIESEL WAS REASONABLE. 4. THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE RESPONDENT POINTED OUT THAT ADMITTEDLY THE GRIEVANCE WAS ONLY IN RELATION TO EVAPORATION LOSS OF 1% IN PETROL ACCOUNT AND NOT IN THE ACCOUNT OF DIESEL. 5. WE FIND THAT AN ERROR HAS CREPT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CONCLUDING PARA 9 WHICH WAS AS UNDER: 9. THE TRIBUNAL HAD HELD THE EVAPORATION LOSS OF 1 % IN THE ACCOUNT OF BOTH THE PETROL AND DIESEL AS REASONABLE . THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEALS BEFORE US IS ALSO IN RELATION TO THE CLAIM OF EVAPORATION/HANDLING LOSS. FOLLOWING THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE CHANDIGARH BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL WE ARE IN A GREEMENT WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT (APPEALS) IN ALLOWING THE C LAIM OF EVAPORATION/HANDLING LOSS AT 1% OF THE TOTAL SALES AND DISALLOWING THE BALANCE. UPHOLDING THE ORDER OF THE CIT (APPEA LS) WE DISMISS GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN BOTH THE APPEALS. 6. WE FIND MERIT IN THE PLEA RAISED BY THE APPLICAN T REVENUE IN THIS REGARD AND THE REVISED PARA 9 WOULD READ AS UNDER: 9. THE TRIBUNAL HAD HELD THE EVAPORATION LOSS OF 1 % IN THE ACCOUNT OF PETROL AS REASONABLE. THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEALS BEFORE US IS ALSO IN RELATION TO THE CLAIM OF EVAPORATION/HANDLING LOSS. FOLLOWING THE RATIO LAI D DOWN BY THE CHANDIGARH BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL WE ARE IN AGREEMEN T WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT (APPEALS) IN ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF EVAPORATION/HANDLING LOSS AT 1% OF THE TOTAL SALES OF PETROL AND DISALLOWING THE BALANCE. UPHOLDING THE ORDER OF TH E CIT (APPEALS) WE DISMISS GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN BOTH THE APPEALS. 3 7. IN VIEW THEREOF THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION MO VED BY THE APPLICANT REVENUE IS ALLOWED. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FIL ED BY THE APPLICANT REVENUE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 23 RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2013. SD/- SD/- (T.R.SOOD) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 23 RD DECEMBER, 2013 *RATI* COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH