DCIT, New Delhi v. M/s. Vimlesh Industries Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 3279/DEL/2009 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 09-04-2010 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 327920114 RSA 2009
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 3279/DEL/2009
Duration Of Justice 8 month(s) 19 day(s)
Appellant DCIT, New Delhi
Respondent M/s. Vimlesh Industries Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 09-04-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted H
Tribunal Order Date 09-04-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 25-03-2010
Next Hearing Date 25-03-2010
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 20-07-2009
Judgment Text
I.T.A. NO. /DEL/ 1/4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH H NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.3279 /DEL/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 DCIT M/S VIMLESH INDUSTRIES (P) LTD. CIRCLE-17 (1) 7-A SRI RAM ROAD NEW DELHI. V. NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN /GIR/NO.AAACV-2653-F APPELLANT BY : SHRI G.S. SAHOTA SR. DR. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAKESH GUPTA C.A. ORDER PER A.K. GARODIA AM: THIS IS REVENUE'S APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A)-XIX NEW DELHI DATED 29.5.2009 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE READ AS UNDER: - 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E LSD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY THE DO CUMENTS AND NOT SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS.1 63 640/- ATTRIBUTAB LE TO THE DIFFERENCE IN THE FIGURES OF PURCHASES AS DECLARED BY THE ASSESSE E COMPANY AND THE FIGURE OF PURCHASES AS INTIMATED BY M/S SANMAR SPECIALTY CHEMICALS LTD. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.12 75 279/- ADDED BY THE ASSESSING . I.T.A. NO.310308/DEL/ 2/4 OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF INFLATED PURCHASES IN THE RES PECT OF M/S HINDUSTAN COPPER LTD. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.11 768/- ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN PURCHASES MADE FROM P.N. MARKETING. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.1 67 145/- ON ACCOUN T OF DIFFERENCE IN SALES MADE TO M/S LAXMI WIRES. 5. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.2 44 744/- MADE BY T HE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED PURCHASES FROM M/S HINDAL CO INDUSTRIES LTD. 6. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.3 00 000/- ON ACCOUN T OF DIFFERENCE IN PURCHASES MADE FROM M/S ELEMEC COMPONENTS INDUSTRIE S. 7. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.52 086/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED PURCHASES MADE FROM M/S KAYESS & CO. 8. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.52 35 247/- OUT OF TOTAL DISALLOWANCE OF RS.54 53 788/- ON ACCOUNT OF DISCOUNT AND REBATE . 9. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.16 40 966/- OUT OF T HE TOTAL ADDITION OF RS.`18 52 061/- ON ACCOUNT OF ADVANCES FROM CUSTOME RS. 3. IT IS SUBMITTED BY THE LD DR OF THE REVENUE THAT ON ALL THESE ISSUES LD CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THE MATTER ON THE BASIS OF FRESH CONTENTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM WITHOUT GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY T O THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE VERACITY OF THESE CONTENTIONS AND HENCE THESE MATTERS SHOULD GO BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR A FRE SH DECISION AFTER EXAMINING THESE NEW CONTENTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE LD CI T(A). IT IS POINTED OUT THAT WITH REGARD TO GROUND NO. 1 THE MATTER WAS DECIDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER . I.T.A. NO.310308/DEL/ 3/4 AGAINST THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS THAT THERE IS DIF FERENCE IN THE AMOUNT OF PURCHASES SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE FROM M/S SANMAR SPE CIALTY CHEMICALS LTD. TO THE EXTENT OF RS.1 63 640/-. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT AS PER PARA NO.7.2 OF HIS ORDER LD CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THIS ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE A SSESSEE ON THE BASIS THAT M/S INTEC POLYMERS LTD. WAS AMALGAMATED WITH M/S SANMAR SPECIALTY CHEMICALS LTD. IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 W.E.F. 1.4.2004 BUT THI S CONTENTION WAS NEVER RAISED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND HENCE THE SAME WAS NOT EXAMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. REGARDING GROUND NO.2 OF APPEAL ALSO IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITION WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON T HE BASIS THAT THERE IS DIFFERENCE IN THE AMOUNT OF PURCHASE SHOWN BY THE A SSESSEE FROM M/S HINDUSTAN COPPER LTD. (FOR SHORT HCL) AND THE SALES SHOWN BY THAT PARTY I.E. M/S HINDUSTAN COPPER LTD. TO THE ASSESSEE. SUCH DIFFERENCE WAS OF RS.12 75 279/-. THIS ASPECT WAS DECIDED BY LD CIT(A) ON THE BASIS THAT M/S HCL HAS AGREED TO REPLACE THE REJECTED GOODS WITH EQUIVALENT QUANTITY OF GOOD QUA LITY MATERIAL. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED BEFORE LD CIT(A) THAT ON 7.7.2005 THE AC COUNT OF HCL IS DEBITED FOR RS.12 64 094/- AS PURCHASE RETURNS AND ON 3.8.2005 M/S HCL ACCOUNT IS CREDITED FOR THE SAME AMOUNT AS SOON AS THE MATERIA L WAS REPLACED. IT IS SUBMITTED BY THE LD DR OF THE REVENUE THAT THIS CON TENTION WAS NEVER RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND HENCE ON THIS ASPECT ALSO AN OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSING OFFICE R TO EXAMINE THE VERACITY OF THESE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH WERE RAISED FOR THE FIRST TIME BEFORE THE LD CIT(A). IT WAS HIS SUBMISSION THAT ON REMAINING ISSUES ALSO SIMILAR IS THE CASE. LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE ALSO AGREED THAT THESE ISSUES MAY BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR A FRE SH DECISION. ACCORDINGLY WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) ON ALL THESE ISSUES AN D RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR A FRESH DECISION. THE ASSESSEE SHOULD FURNISH ALL NECESSARY EVIDENCES AND DETAILS AND EXPLANATION BEF ORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE SAME THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER SHOULD PASS NECESSARY ORDER AS PER LAW. NEEDLESS TO SAY REASONABLE OPPORT UNITY OF BEING HEARD SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R. . I.T.A. NO.310308/DEL/ 4/4 4. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 9TH APRI L 2010. SD/- SD/- (R.P. TOLANI) (A.K. GA RODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DT. 09..4.2010. HMS COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT (A)- NEW DELHI. 5. THE DR ITAT LOKNAYAK BHAWAN KHAN MARKET NEW DELHI. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER (ITAT NEW DELHI).