North Suburban Wholesale Consumers Co-op Society Ltd., Kolkata v. DCIT, C ircle- 33, Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 2153/KOL/2010 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 04-01-2011

Appeal Details

RSA Number 215323514 RSA 2010
Bench Kolkata
Appeal Number ITA 2153/KOL/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 month(s) 2 day(s)
Appellant North Suburban Wholesale Consumers Co-op Society Ltd., Kolkata
Respondent DCIT, C ircle- 33, Kolkata, Kolkata
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 04-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Bench Allotted SMC
Tribunal Order Date 04-01-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 04-01-2011
Next Hearing Date 04-01-2011
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 02-12-2010
Judgment Text
SMC IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH : KOLKATA () BEFORE . . . . . . . . ) [BEFORE HONBLE SRI D. K. TYAGI JM] ! ! ! ! / I.T.A NO. 2153/KOL/2010 '#$ %&' '#$ %&' '#$ %&' '#$ %&'/ // / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 NORTH SUBARBAN WHOLESALE CONSUMERS -VS- DEPUTY CO MMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CO-OP. SOCIETY LTD. (PA NO.AAAAN 2241 B) CIRCLE-33 KOLKATA. ()* / APPELLANT ) (+)*/ RESPONDENT ) FOR THE APPELLANT: SRI A. K. DE FOR THE RESPONDENT : SRI PIJUSH KOLHE / ORDER THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED A GAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) KOLKATA DATED 26.08.2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 006-07 ON THE SOLE GROUND OF CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.33283/- AND RS.1320/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED PURCHASES. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE H AS SHOWN TOTAL PURCHASES OF RS.2 14 217/- AND RS.7 84 051/- FROM SUNRISE SPICES LTD. AND SUMA N PROTEINS (P) LTD. RESPECTIVELY. IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S. 133(6) THE SAID PARTIES IN FORMED THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THEY HAD MADE SALES OF RS.1 80 934/- AND RS.7 85 371/- TO TH E ASSESSEE. AS NO EXPLANATION WAS OFFICERED REGARDING THE DIFFERENCE OF RS.33 283/- (RS.2 14 21 7/- - RS.1 80 934/-) AND RS.1 320/- (RS.7 85 371/- - RS.7 84 051/-) THE ASSESSING OFFI CER ADDED THE SAME AS UNEXPLAINED PURCHASES. BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY TH E ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE DIFFERENCE OF RS.33 283/- IN THE CASE OF SUNRISE SPICES LTD. WAS ON ACCOUNT OF NON-CONSIDERATION OF THREE BILLS AND THE DIFFERENCE OF RS.1320/- IN THE CASE OF SUMA N PROTIENS (P) LTD. WAS DUE TO CASH PAYMENT OF RS.1320/-. SINCE THESE SUBMISSIONS WERE NOT MAD E AT THE ASSESSMENT STAGE AND SECONDLY THE BILLS OR PAYMENT AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE NO T INCORPORATED BY THE CONCERNED PARTIES AS THEY DO NOT APPEAR IN THE LEDGER COPIES SENT TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN COMPLIANCE TO NOTICE U/S. 133(6) THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE N OT VERIFIABLE AND THE LD. CIT(A) DECLINED TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER A ND CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS. BEFORE ME THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS AS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADDED A SUM OF RS.33 283/- TREATING THE SAME AS DIFFERENCE ON ACCOUNT OF PURCHASE MADE FROM SUNRISE SPICES LTD. THE SAID SUM IS PROPERLY DOCUMENTED VIDE BILL NO.76 321 AND 635 DATED 29.4.2 005 05.08.2005 AND 10.12.2005 FOR 2 RS.16 803/- RS.8160 AND RS.8320 RESPECTIVELY. BOT H THE AUTHORITIES BELOW DID NOT CONSIDER THE PURCHASE BILLS AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION. HE ALSO CONTENDED THAT THE DIFFERENCE OF RS.1320/- AS ADDED BACK TO THE TOTAL INCOME IS NOTH ING BUT TOWARDS PAYMENT TO SUPPLIER SUMAN PROTEINS (P) LTD. IN CASH. HE ALSO CONTENDED THAT THE MATTER MAY KINDLY BE RESTORED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH HEARING WHERE THE ASSES SEE CAN PRODUCE ALL THE BILLS FOR VERIFICATION. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. DR VEHEMENTLY SUPPORT ED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND URGED BEFORE THE BENCH TO CONFIRM THE SAME. 4. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULL Y PERUSING THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD I FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE AD DITIONS AS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRODUCE NECESSARY BILLS FOR VERIFICATION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND AT THE APPELLATE STAGE THE SAME CANNOT BE VERIF IED. BEFORE US THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARI NG WAS NOT GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE FOR RECONCILIATION THE MATTER AND HE FILED SOME ADDITIO N EVIDENCE WHICH WAS NOT BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE AND IN THE INTER EST OF NATURAL JUSTICE I RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH VERIFICATIO N OF THE EVIDENCES THAT MAY BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM AFTER AFFORDING A REASONABLE O PPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS THEREFORE ALLOWED F OR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- . . (D. K. TYAGI) JUDI CIAL MEMBER ( - - - -) )) ) DATED : 4TH JANUARY 2011 %./ '#01 '2% JD.(SR.P.S.) 3 +''4 54&6- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . )* / APPELLANT NORTH SUBARBAN WHOLESALE CONSUMERS CO-OP . SOCIETY LTD. 458/B JESSORE ROAD KOLKATA-700 074. 2 +)* / RESPONDENT : DCIT CIRCLE-33 KOLKATA. 3 . ' # / THE CIT KOLKATA 4 . ' # ( )/ THE CIT(A) KOLKATA 5 . %=' +'# / DR KOLKATA BENCHES KOLKATA 4 +'/ TRUE COPY #>/ BY ORDER ? 1 /DEPUTY REGISTRAR .