Caffil Pvt.Ltd.,, Ahmedabad v. The ACIT.,Circle-1,, Ahmedabad

ITA 1785/AHD/2009 | 2003-2004
Pronouncement Date: 21-01-2011 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 178520514 RSA 2009
Assessee PAN AAACC6398L
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 1785/AHD/2009
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 23 day(s)
Appellant Caffil Pvt.Ltd.,, Ahmedabad
Respondent The ACIT.,Circle-1,, Ahmedabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 21-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 21-01-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 11-01-2011
Next Hearing Date 11-01-2011
Assessment Year 2003-2004
Appeal Filed On 28-05-2009
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH B BEFORE SHRI MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.C. AGRAWAL ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE OF HEARING : 11/1/2011 DRAFTED ON: 11/ 01/2011 ITA NO.1785/AHD/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04 CAFFIL PVT.LTD. 29 GIDC ESTATE VATVA AHMEDABAD VS. THE ACIT CIRCLE-1 AHMEDABAD-380 014 PAN/GIR NO. : AAACC6398 L ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : SHRI N.C. AMIN RESPONDENT BY: SHRI SANJAY RAI SR. D.R. O R D E R PER SHRI MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL AT THE BEHEST OF THE ASSESSEE WH ICH HAS EMANATED FROM THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) -VI AHMEDABAD DATED 11/02/2009 PASSED FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 . THE ONLY GROUND IS IN RESPECT OF CONFIRMATION OF LEVY OF PENALTY U/ S.271(1)(C) OF THE I.T.ACT OF RS.33 388/-. 2. FACTS IN BRIEF AS EMERGED FROM THE CORRESPONDI NG PENALTY ORDER PASSED U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T. ACT 1961 DATED 28/08/2006 AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S.143(3) OF THE I.T.ACT D ATED 24/02/2006 WERE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURI NG DYESTUFF CHEMICALS. THE IMPUGNED ADDITION WHICH WAS THE SUBJECT MATTER OF LEVY OF PENALTY WAS DISALLOWANCE OF DUTY DRAW BACK WHICH WAS WRONGL Y CLAIMED BY THE ITA NO. 1785/AH D/2009 CAFFIL PVT.LTD. VS. ACIT ASST.YEAR 2003-04 - 2 - ASSESSEE. IT WAS NOTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER T HAT THE SAME HAD ALREADY BEEN ALLOWED IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01 AND WRONGLY IT WAS NOTED UNDER THE HEAD SUNDRY BALANCE WRITTEN OF F WHICH WAS THE DUTY DRAW BACK ALREADY CONSIDERED IN THE PAST. SIN CE THE REASON OF ADDITION HAD EMERGED OUT OF THE RECORD ITSELF THER EFORE THE SAME WAS NOT EVEN CHALLENGED BY THE ASSESSEE. WITH THIS BRIEF F ACTUAL BACKGROUND WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. AS APPEARED FROM THE ABOVE DISCUSSION THE ISSUE OF CLAIM OF WRITE OFF OF DUTY DRAW BACK WAS NOT ONLY CONTINUOUS BUT ALSO IT WAS MISTAKENLY CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE BY CLUBBING IT UNDER AN ANOTHER HEAD. THE SAID MISTAKE WAS DETECTED AND THAT WAS MADE THE BASIS OF ADDITION. BUT AS FAR AS THE QUESTION OF L EVY OF CONCEALMENT PENALTY IS CONCERNED THIS IS NOT THE CASE OF THE R EVENUE THAT EITHER THE PARTICULARS OF INCOME HAVE BEEN CONCEALED OR THE AS SESSEE HAS FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS. THOSE FACTS AND FIGURES WE RE STATED TO BE VERY MUCH BEFORE THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AND ONLY ON THA T BASIS THE MISTAKE WAS DETECTED WHICH WAS FOUND TO BE AN APPARENT MIS TAKE HENCE EVEN NOT CHALLENGED BY THE ASSESSEE. INTERESTINGLY ONE MORE FACT HAS ALSO BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT THEREAFTER ON 2/2/2 009 THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PASSED AN ORDER U/S.154 OF THE I.T.ACT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION I.E. ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 THROUGH WHICH THE TOTAL DISALLOWANCE OF RS.88 130/- WAS REDUCED TO RS.15 0 98/- ON ACCOUNT OF THE FACT THAT THE COMPUTATION WAS INCORRECTLY MADE AS PRESCRIBED U/S.80HHC OF THE I.T.ACT. HENCE THE OVERALL POSITI ON IS THAT A CLAIM WAS MADE WHICH WAS DISALLOWED BEING NOT ADMISSIBLE THE REFORE IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION THE ISSUE IS DIRECTLY BY THE DE CISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. RELIANCE PETR OPRODUCTS (P) LTD. ITA NO. 1785/AH D/2009 CAFFIL PVT.LTD. VS. ACIT ASST.YEAR 2003-04 - 3 - REPORTED AT [2010] 322 ITR 158 (SC) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT A MERE MAKING OF A CLAIM IT IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW BY ITSELF WILL NOT AMOUNT TO FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS REGARDING THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. FOLLOWING THIS PRECEDENT AND UNDER THE TOTALITY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS DISCUSSED HEREINABOVE THE GROUND IS HE REBY ALLOWED. 3. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER SIGNED DATED AND PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 21/ 01 /2011. SD/- SD/- ( D.C. AGRAWAL) ( MUKUL KR. SH RAWAT ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBE R AHMEDABAD; DATED 21 / 01 /2011 T.C. NAIR SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE DEPA RTMENT. 3. THE CIT CONCERNED. 4. THE LD. CIT(AP PEALS)-VI AHMEDABAD 5. THE DR AHMEDABAD BENCH 6. THE GUARD FILE. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) ITAT AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION.. 11.1.11. 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 11.1.11 OTHER MEMBER 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S21.1.11 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 21.1.11 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER