ITO, New Delhi v. M/s. Farvision Electronics (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 1158/DEL/2012 | 2008-2009
Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2013 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 115820114 RSA 2012
Assessee PAN AAACP5753A
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 1158/DEL/2012
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 24 day(s)
Appellant ITO, New Delhi
Respondent M/s. Farvision Electronics (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 31-07-2013
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 31-07-2013
Date Of Final Hearing 03-07-2013
Next Hearing Date 03-07-2013
Assessment Year 2008-2009
Appeal Filed On 06-03-2012
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: B NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SMT. DIVA SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI J. S. REDDY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NOS. 1158/DEL/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 ITO VS. M/S FARVISION ELECTRONICS (I.) WARD-11(2) PVT. LTD. C.R. BUILDING 201 NEEL KANTH PALACE NEW DELHI. 190-191 SANT NAGAR EAST KAILASH NEW DELHI. 110065 PAN:AAACP5753A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : MS. SHUMANA SEN DR. ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PIYUSH KAUSHIK ADV. ORDER PER J. S. REDDY AM : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE DIRECTED AGA INST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A) -XIII NEW DELHI DATED 24.01.2012 FOR THE A.Y. 2008-09. 2. FACTS OF THE CASE: THE ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY ENG AGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING ELECTRONICS SUB ASSEMBLY FOR CTV. IT FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ELECTRONICALLY ON 26.9.2008 DECLARING INCO ME OF RS.2 85 436/-. THE I.T.A. NOS. 1158/DEL/2012 2 AO PASSED AN ORDER U/S 143(3) ON 30.12.2010 DETERM INING THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.42 71 641/- INTER ALIA MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS.34 00 205/- ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN THE RECEIPTS AS PER TDS CERTIFICAT E AND THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT AND RS.5 86 000/- ON ACCOUNT OF EXCISE DUT Y CHARGED TO PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT UNDER EXCLUSIVE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING. 3. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APP EAL THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY GRANTED RELIEF. THE REVENUE FILED THIS AP PEAL ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDIT ION OF RS.34 00 205/- ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN RECEIPTS AS PER THE TDS CERTIFICATES AND THE RECEIPTS SHOWN IN THE PROF IT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. 2. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN IGNORING THE REASON ING GIVEN BY THE AO IN MAKING THE ADDITION OF RS.34 00 205/-. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDIT ION OF RS.5 86 000/- ON ACCOUNT OF EXCISE DUTY. 4. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN IGNORING THE FINDIN GS OF THE AO THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS FOLLOWING EXCLUSIVE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING AND AS SUCH THE EXPENDITURE ON ACCOUNT OF EXCISE DU TY SHOULD NOT HAVE FORMED PART OF PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING THE INCOME AS PER THE INCOME TAX ACT. I.T.A. NOS. 1158/DEL/2012 3 5. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD ALTER OR AMEN D ANY GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED ABOVE AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 4. WE HAVE HEARD MS. SHUMANA SEN THE LD. DR ON BEHA LF OF THE REVENUE AND SHRI PIYUSH KAUSHIK LD. COUNSEL ON BEHALF OF T HE ASSESSEE. 5. THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE GENUINENESS OF THE DEBIT NOTE IN QUESTION WAS DOUBTED BY THE AO AS IT IS A SELF SE RVING DOCUMENT. SHE REFERRED THE REASONS GIVEN BY THE AO AT PAGES 3 AND 4 OF HER ORDER AND DISPUTED THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT (A) AT PARA 5. 2 OF HIS ORDER. ON GROUND NO. 2. SHE RELIED ON THE FINDINGS OF THE AO. 6. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ON THE OTHER HA ND FILED TO PAPER BOOK THE CONSISTENT OF 21 PAGES AND 12 PAGES RESPECTIVEL Y AND SUBMITTED THAT THE DEBIT NOTE IN QUESTION WAS RAISED BY A CUSTOMER OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS NOT A CONNECTED PARTY AND HENCE IT IS WRONG TO TERM THI S DOCUMENT AS A SELF SERVING DOCUMENT. HE POINT OUT THAT THE AO DID NOT VERIFY THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE REJECTING IT. IT WAS POINTED OUT T HAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT RECEIVED THE SAID INCOME AND NO TDS CREDIT WAS CLAI MED BY THE ASSESSEE BASIS ON THE TDS CERTIFICATE. ON GROUND NO. 2 IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THIS RELATE S TO ADDITIONAL EXCISE DUTY PAYED. HE SUBMITTED THAT WRONG MODVAT CREDIT W AS CLAIMED FOR THE MONTHS FROM APRIL 2005 TO OCTOBER 2007. HE FILED A COPY OF FORM R.G-23A PART-II AND SUBMITTED THAT THE AMOUNT WAS PAID DURI NG THE YEAR AND I.T.A. NOS. 1158/DEL/2012 4 ALLOWABLE AS SUCH. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT FOLLO WING EXCLUSIVE OR INCLUSIVE METHOD DOES NOT RESULTANT IN ANY ADDITIO N. 7. RIVAL CONTENTIONS HEARD. ON A CAREFUL CONSIDERAT ION OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND A PERUSAL OF THE PAPE RS ON RECORD AND THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AS WELL AS THE CASE LAWS CITED WE HOLD AS FOLLOWS: 8. GROUND NO. 1 IS ON THE FACTUAL FINDING AS TO WHA T IS THE CORRECT AMOUNT OF RECEIPT OF THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESS EES CUSTOMER M/S PROTONICS SYSTEMS INDIA PVT. LTD. HAS RAISED A DEBI T NOTE AND HAS ALSO GIVEN A CONFIRMATION LETTER OF THE TURNOVER ALONG WITH PAR TICULARS OF ITS PAN NO. INCOME-TAX ASSESSMENT DETAILS ETC. THE AO HAS NOT C ONDUCTED ANY VERIFICATION OR INQUIRY ON THESE DOCUMENTS. THERE IS NO FINDING THAT THESE EVIDENCES ARE FALSE OR INCORRECT. 9. IT IS NOT A CASE WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN CR EDIT OF TAX OF THIS ERRONEOUS TDS CERTIFICATE. THE FACTUAL FINDING OF T HE LD. CIT (A) AS TO THE CORRECT FIGURE OF TURNOVER IS NOT CONTROVERTED BY T HE LD. DR. ON THESE FACTS WE UPHOLD THE FINDING OF THE LD. CIT (A) THAT THE D ISCREPANCY IN QUESTION WAS A BONAFIDE ERROR WHICH IS NOT ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE A SSESSEE AND THAT THE REJECTION OF THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION BY THE AO WA S NOT JUSTIFIED. IN THE RESULT GROUND NO. 1 OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. I.T.A. NOS. 1158/DEL/2012 5 10. ON GROUND NO. 2 WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PRODUCED DOCUMENTS TO DEMONSTRATE THAT IT HAD WRONGFUL TAKEN INPUT CREDIT FOR THE EARLIER PERIODS. THIS FACT WAS POINTED OUT BY THE AUDIT PARTY. 11. ON COMING TO KNOW OF THIS WRONG CREDIT THE ASS ESSEE MADE THE PAYMENT DURING THE CURRENT FINANCIAL YEAR. ON THESE FACTS WE UPHOLD THE FACTUAL FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT (A) THAT THE ACTUAL PAYMENT OF EXCISE DUTY IS ALLOWABLE DURING THE YEAR. ON THE ISSUE OF ACCOUNTI NG METHOD FOLLOWED BY THE ASSESSEE AS THIS AMOUNT IS ALLOWABLE ON ACTUAL PAYMENT THE MODE OF PRESENTATION IN THE ACCOUNTS IS OF NO CONSEQUENCE. IN RESULT THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 10. IN RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31 ST /7/2013. SD/- SD/- (DIVA SINGH ) (J. S. RE DDY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT ME MBER DATED 31/07/2013 *AK VERMA* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR