STANDARD CONDUITS P. LTD, MUMBAI v. CIT CEN IV, MUMBAI

ITA 3969/MUM/2013 | 2007-2008
Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2013 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 396919914 RSA 2013
Assessee PAN AAACT1424C
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 3969/MUM/2013
Duration Of Justice 5 month(s) 13 day(s)
Appellant STANDARD CONDUITS P. LTD, MUMBAI
Respondent CIT CEN IV, MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 31-10-2013
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 31-10-2013
Assessment Year 2007-2008
Appeal Filed On 17-05-2013
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI H.L.KARWA PRESIDENT & SHRI N.K.BILLAIYA AM ITA N O S . 4148 TO 4152 / MUM/ 20 1 3 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 20 0 4 - 05 2005 - 06 2006 - 07 2007 - 08 & 200 8 - 20 0 9 ) M/S TURAKHIA FERROMET PVT. LTD. 414 NAV VYAPAR BHAVAN 49 P.D.MELLO ROAD CARNAC BUNDER MUMBAI - 400 009. VS. CIT CENTRAL (IV) MUMBAI PAN/GIR NO. : A A ACT 1424 C ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) AND ITA NO S . 3966 TO 3969 /MUM/20 13 ( ASSESSMENT YEARS :2004 - 05 2005 - 06 2006 - 07 & 2007 - 08 ) M/S STANDARD CONDUITS PVT. LTD. 2/3 ASHOK CHAMBERS DEVJI RATANSY MARG (BROACH STREET) MASJID BUNDER MUMBAI - 400 009 . VS. CIT CENTRAL (IV) MUMBAI PAN/GIR NO. : AA DCS 8686 C ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) /A SSESSEE BY : SHRI RAKESH JOSHI /REVENUE BY : SHRI GIRIJA DAYAL DATE OF HEARING : 2 8 TH DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31 ST OCTOBER 2013 O R D E R PER BENCH : THI S COMMON ORDER SHALL GOVERN THE DISPOSAL OF NINE APPEALS WHICH HAVE BEEN PREFERRED BY TWO SEPARATE ASSESSEE S AGAINST TWO SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE LEARNED CIT MUMBAI PASSED UNDER SECTION 263 OF THE ACT PERTAINING TO A.Y. 2004 - 05 2005 - 06 2006 - 07 2007 - 08 & 2 008 - 09 RESPECTIVELY. ITA NO S . 4148 TO 4152 / 1 3 & 3966 - 3969/13 2 2 . SINCE BOTH THE PARTIES AGREED THAT THE FACTS AND ISSUES INVOLVED IN ALL THESE APPEALS ARE IDENTICAL THEREFORE ALL THE CASES HAVE BEEN HEARD AND DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AND BREVITY . 3 . FIR ST WE WILL TAKE UP ITA NO S .4148 TO 4152/2013 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE M/S TURAKHIA FERROMET PVT. LTD. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004 - 05 2005 - 06 2006 - 07 2007 - 08 & 2008 - 09 RESPECTIVELY AND THE OUTCOME OF THE SAME WILL BE APPLICABLE TO OTHER ANALOGOUS APPEALS I.E. ITA NOS. 3966 TO 39699 /M/201 3 FILED BY ANOTHER ASSESSEE NAMELY M/S STANDARD CONDUITS PVT. LTD. FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004 - 05 2005 - 06 2006 - 07 2007 - 08 RESPECTIVELY . 4 . IN APPEALS OF ASSESSEE M/S TURAKHIA FERROMET PVT. LTD. THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS D ATED 28 - 3 - 2013 WHICH HAS BEEN PASSED BY THE CIT UNDER SECTION 263 WHEREIN THE CIT HAS INVOKED HIS JURISDICTION FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004 - 05 2005 - 06 2006 - 07 2007 - 08 & 2008 - 09 RESPECTIVELY BY PASSING A CONSOLIDATED ORDER WHICH IS UNDER CONSIDERATION B EFORE US. 5 . THE CIT(A) WAS OF THE FIRM BELIEF THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 153A OF THE ACT PASSED ON 27 - 12 - 2010 WAS ERRONEOUS INASMUCH AS IT WAS PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST O F THE REVENUE. THE ENTIRE ISSUE REVOLVE S AR OUND THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. ITA NO S . 4148 TO 4152 / 1 3 & 3966 - 3969/13 3 THE CIT WAS ALSO OF THE BELIEF THAT THE TRADING RESULTS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT PROPER AND THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN BOGUS TRADING LOSS. THE CIT IN HIS NOTICE U NDER SECTION 263 OF THE ACT INTER ALIA OBSERVED AS UNDER : - 8. THEREFORE IT WAS NECESSARY TO EXAMINE THE TRANSACTIONS BY CONDUCTING ENQUIRIES FROM VARIOUS CONCERNS PARTICULARLY WITH WHOM LOSS MAKING TRANSACTIONS WERE SHOWN AND ALSO TO VERIFY THE GENUIN ENESS OR OTHERWISE OF THE SALE/PURCHASE TRANSACTIONS. HOWEVER IT SEEMS THAT THE AO HAS READILY ACCEPTED THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE CO. WITHOUT MAKING ANY EXAMINATION OR VERIFICATION WITH REGARD TO THE GENUINENESS OF THESE TRANSACTIONS. 9. IT IS AL SO SEEN THAT THOUGH THE AO HAS ASKED FOR SEVERAL DETAILS IN THE NOTICE DATED 19 - 8 - 2010 HOWEVER THE FULL DETAILS/EXPLANATION WITH REGARD TO SEVERAL VITAL ENQUIRIES HAVE NOT BEEN OBTAINED. BESIDES EXPLANATION ON THE NATURE AND EFFECT OF TRANSACTIONS INDICA TED IN SOME OF THE SEIZED DOCUMENT HAS NOT BEEN LOOKED INTO ALTHOUGH THE RELEVANT QUERIES WAS RAISED. 10. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS THE ASSESSMENT ORDER APPEARS TO BE ERRONEOUS IN SO FAR AS IT IS PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE WHICH CALLS FOR AC TION U/S.263 OF THE I.T. ACT. BEFORE DOING SO I HEREBY GIVEN U AN OPPORTUNITY TO SHOW CAUSE AS TO WHY SUCH ORDER SHOULD NOT BE PASSED U/S.263 SETTING ASIDE THE AFORESAID ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 27 - 12 - 2010 WITH A DIRECTION TO THE AO TO FRAME THE ASSESSMEN T DE NOVO AFTER CONDUCTING NECESSARY VERIFICATION/ENQUIRY. 6. THE ASSESSEE FILED A DETAILED REPLY TO THIS NOTICE OF THE CIT EXPLAINING THAT DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED COMPLETE DETAILS IN RESPECT OF SHARE AP PLICATION MONEY RECEIVED FROM VARIOUS COMPANIES. IT WAS ALSO EXPLAINED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FURNISHED THE INCOME TAX PAN NUMBER AND AL L RELATED INFORMATION TO THE AO WHICH HAS BEEN THOROUGHLY EXAMINED BY THE AO. THEREFORE IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE AO HAS COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT APPLYING HIS MIND WHICH WOULD RENDER THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF THE ITA NO S . 4148 TO 4152 / 1 3 & 3966 - 3969/13 4 REVENUE. THE DETAIL SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT D ID NOT FIND ANY FAVOUR FROM THE CIT WHO WAS OF THE FIRM BELIEF THAT THE AO DID NOT MAKE DETAILED INVESTIGATION IN RESPECT OF THE COMPANIES WHO HAVE GIVEN SHARE APPLICATION MONEY TO THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT WAS ALSO OF THE FIRM BELIEF THAT IN THE CASE OF SOME OF THE APPLICANT COMPANIES THE INVESTIGATION WING HAS MADE SPECIFIC OBSERVATIONS THAT THESE COMPANIES ARE ONLY NAME L ENDERS. ON THE CONTRARY THE AO HAS SIMPLY ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION WITH REGARD TO THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AND TO PRODUCE THE PARTIES FOR VERIFICATION WITHOUT CONFRONTING THE ASSESSEE WITH INCRIMINATING MATERIALS/SUBMISSIONS POINTED OUT THAT SUCH INVESTORS COMPANIES WERE MERELY ENTRY GIVERS ONLY. THE CIT FINALLY CONCLUDED AT PARA 28.1 OF HIS ORDER AS UNDER : - 28.1 IN VIEW OF THE DETAILED DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS GIVEN IN THE PRECEDING PARA I HOLD THAT THE ORDER OF THE AO IS ERRONEOUS AS IT WAS MADE WITHOUT MAKING ANY ENQUIRIES AND WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND AND WITHOUT EXAMINING THE REASON FOR HIGH PREMIUM AND OTHER RELATED CIRCUMSTANCES. AS THE ORDER IS SET ASIDE ON THE ISSUE OF SHARE CAPITAL IT IS ALSO SET ASIDE ON THE ISSUE OF THE DEFECTS IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND SEIZED MATERIAL. THE AO IS DIRECTED TO REFRAME THE ORDER DENOVO AFTER CONDUCTING NECESSARY ENQUIRY AND VER IFYING ALL THE DETAILS . BEING AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDER OF THE CIT THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEALS HERE BEFORE US . 7 . LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DREW OUR ATTENTI ON TO THE VARIOUS NOTICES ISSUED BY THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDIN GS AND SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS MADE DETAILED ENQUIRY IN RESPECT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AND ALSO IN RESPECT OF THE TRADING ITA NO S . 4148 TO 4152 / 1 3 & 3966 - 3969/13 5 ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED NECESSARY DETAILS WITH SUPPORTING EVIDENCE S TO DISCHARGE ITS ONUS UNDER SECTI ON 68 OF THE ACT. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE FACTS OF THE CASE W ERE SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. LOVELY EXPORTS (P) LTD. REPORTED IN 216 CTR 195 . IT IS THE SAY OF THE COUNSEL THAT AFTER CONSIDERING THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE AND AFTER VERIFICATION MADE BY THE AO THE AO FINALLY CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT NO ADDITION IS REQUIRED IN RESPECT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY. SIMILARLY IN RESPECT OF TRADING RESULTS THE AO HAS MADE VERI FICATION WITH REFERENCE TO THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS VIS - - VIS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT NO ADDITION IS REQUIRED IN RESPECT OF TRADING RESULTS. THE COUNSEL CONCLUDED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT UNDER SECTION 263 IS BAD IN LAW INASMUCH AS THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS NEITHER ERRONEOUS NOR PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE. 8 . PER CONTRA LEARNED DR STRONGLY RELIED UPON THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT. 9 . WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE ORDER OF THE CIT PASSED UNDER SE CTION 263 OF THE ACT. A BARE READING OF SECTION 263(1) MAKES IT CLEAR THAT THE PREREQUISITE TO THE EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION BY THE COMMISSIONER SUO MOTU UNDER IT IS THAT THE ORDER OF THE AO IS ERRONEOUS IN SO FAR AS IT IS PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST S OF THE R EVENUE. THE COMMISSIONER HAS TO BE SATISFIED WITH TWIN CONDITIONS ITA NO S . 4148 TO 4152 / 1 3 & 3966 - 3969/13 6 NAMELY ( I ) THE ORDER OF THE AO SOUGHT TO BE REVISED IS ERRONEOUS ; AND (II ) IT IS PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST S OF THE R EVENUE. IF ONE OF THEM IS ABSENT RECOURSE CANNOT BE H A D TO SECT ION 263(1) OF THE ACT. FOR THESE OBSERVATIONS WE DRAW SUPPORT FROM THE DECISION OF THE HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF MALABAR INDUSTRIAL CO. LTD. VS. CIT REPORTED IN (2000) 243 ITR 83 (SC) . FURTHER THE ERROR ENVISAGED BY SECTION 263 I S NOT ONE WH ICH DEPENDS ON POSSIBILITY OR G UESS WORK IT SHOULD BE ACTUALLY AN ERROR OF EITHER OF FACT OR OF LAW. LET US NOW CONSIDER THE ENQUIRIES MADE BY THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN RESPECT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY. VIDE NOTICE DATED 1 9 - 8 - 2010 WHICH IS EXHIBITED AT PAGE 29 OF THE PAPER BOOKS THE AO SOUGHT DETAILS FROM THE ASSESSEE AS UNDER : - A) PLEASE FURNISH THE DETAILS OF SHARE CAPITAL AND SHARE PREMIUM RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR ALONG WITH NAME AND ADDRESS OF INVESTORS; B) PLEASE F URNISH THE DETAILS OF UNSECURED LOAN WITH NAME AND FULL ADDRESS WITH PAN NO. AND CONFIRMATION OF THE SAME . FURTHER IN RESPECT OF TRADING ACTIVITY FOLLOWING QUESTIONS WERE RAISED : - 10. PLEASE EXPLAIN AS TO WHY YOUR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS SHOULD NOT BE REJECT ED AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145(3) OF I.T. ACT 1961 FOR THE FOLLOWINGS REASONS : - I) ASSESSEE FOLLOWS FIFO METHOD OF STOCK VALUATION. PHYSICAL STOCK VERIFICATION IS NOT BEING MADE AND VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK IS IMPROPER. FOR EXAMPLE IT IS SEEN FR OM STORK SUMMARY - ITEM REGISTER FOR COLD SHEETS/COILS THAT AS ON 31.3.2004 STOCK OF THE ITEMS LEFT IS 154.058 TONS. THIS STOCK HAS BEEN VALUED AT RS. 25193.40 PER TON BUT THE LAST PURCHASES WHICH COMPRISE THIS STOCK HAVE BEEN MADE AT PRICES VARYING FROM RS. 27250.40 TO RS.30800/ - PER TON. THE ITA NO S . 4148 TO 4152 / 1 3 & 3966 - 3969/13 7 AVERAGE VALUE OF CLOSING STOCK ON FIFO METHOD WORKS OUT TO RS.30 228/ - PER TON. II) IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FROM THE RECORDS MAINTAINED TO LINK A SALE TO A PARTICULARS PURCHASE. DUE TO THIS DEFECT IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO VERIF Y WHETHER ANY SALE MADE RESULTED IN PROFIT OR LOSS AND ASCERTAIN ITS QUANTUM. III) THERE ARE SALE/PURCHASE TRANSACTIONS WITH CERTAIN PARTIES KNOWN FOR INDULGING IN HAWALA ENTRIES AND LARGE NUMBER OF THESE TRANSACTION ARE THUS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS DO NOT GIVE TRUE PICTURE OF BUSINESS AFFAIRS. 10 . THE ASSESSEES REPLY IS AT PAGE 48 OF THE PAPER BOOK DATED 7 - 9 - 2010 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE LIST SHOWING DETAILS OF SHARE CAPITAL RECEIVED DURING THE FINANCIAL YEARS 2002 - 03 TO 2008 - 09. FURTHER IN RESP ECT OF TRADING RESULTS THE ASSESSEE FILED THE DETAILS OF PURCHASES OF RS. 10 LAKHS AND ABOVE . FURTHER IN ITS REPLY DATED 27 - 10 - 2010 THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT WHY ITS BOOKS OF A CCOUNTS SHOULD NOT BE REJECTED EXPLANATION ON STOCK VALUATION WAS GIVEN. TH E ASSESSEE FURTHER EXPLAINED THE LINK OF SALE TO A PARTICULAR PURCHASE. THIS DETAILED REPLY IS PLACED ON RECORD FROM PAGES 56 TO 65 OF THE PAPER BOOK. A PERUSAL OF THE MATERIAL EVIDENCE BROUGHT ON RECORD BEFORE US SHOW THAT THE AO HAD ISSUED SUMMONS UNDER SECTION 131 OF THE ACT TO VARIOUS COMPANIES WHO HAVE GIVEN SHARE APPLICATION MONEY TO THE ASSESSEE. COPIES OF THESE SUMMONS ARE EXHIBITED FROM PAGES 134 TO 148 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE GIST OF THESE SUMMONS SHOW THAT THE AO ASKED FOR THE DETAILS OF SHARE AP PLICATION MONEY AND LOANS INVESTED/GIVEN TO THE FOUR COMPANIES DURING A.Y.2003 - 04 TO 2009 - 10. AMONG THESE TWO COMPANIES NAMELY M/S TURAKHIA FERROMET PVT. LTD. AND M/S STANDARD CONDUITS PVT. LTD. ARE ASSESSEES UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE AO HAD ITA NO S . 4148 TO 4152 / 1 3 & 3966 - 3969/13 8 FURTHER ASK ED TO PRODUCE THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT FOR THE ABOVE RELEVANT PERIOD IN WHICH LOANS/SHARE APPLICATION MONEY HAS BEEN GIVEN TO THE ABOVE CONCERNS. WE FURTHER FIND IN THE PAPER BOOK FROM PAGES 149 TO 176 REPLIES FILED BY THESE CO MPANIES. THUS IT IS CLEAR THAT THE AO HAS MADE SPECIFIC ENQUIRIES IN RELATION TO THE TRADING LOSS AS WELL AS SHARE APPLICATION MONEY TO WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN SPECIFIC REPLY WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE S DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT P ROCEEDINGS. 11 . OUR VIEW IS FURTHER FORTIFIED BY THE ORDER SHEET ENTR IES DATED 27 - 10 - 2010 19 - 11 - 2010 23 - 11 - 2010 AND 6 - 12 - 2010 WHICH HAVE BEEN EXHIBITED AT PAGES 26 & 27 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE AO MADE THE FOLLOWING TWO OBSERVATIONS IN RESPECT OF THE TWO ISSUES UNDER CONSIDERATION IN PARA 6.6 AT PAGE 9 OF HIS ORDER AND IN PARA 7.5 AT PAGE 12 OF HIS ORDER WHICH ARE AS UNDER : - 6.6. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ASSESSEES REPLY AND LOOKING TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND VERIFICATION MADE IN THIS REGARD WITH REFERE NCE TO SEIZED DOCUMENTS AND BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS / BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND SUPPORTING VOUCHERS PRODUCED ANY ADDITION IN RESPECT OF THESE TRANSACTIONS IS NOT BEING MADE. X X X X X X X X X 7.5 AFTER CONSIDERING THE ASSESSEES REPLY AND LOOKING TO THE FACT S OF THE CASE AND VERIFICATION MADE IN THIS REGARD ANY ADDITION IN RESPECT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY IS NOT BEING MADE. THESE ABOVE OBSERVATIONS OF THE AO AFTER CONSIDERING THE RELEVANT MATERIAL EVIDENCE S BROUGHT ON RECORD SHOW THAT THE AO HAS APPLIED HIS MIND BEFORE ACCEPTING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITS ITA NO S . 4148 TO 4152 / 1 3 & 3966 - 3969/13 9 REPLIES. IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE AO HAS NOT MADE ANY ENQUIRY AS ALLEGED BY THE CIT . THE ORDER OF THE AO MAY BE BRIEF AND CRYPTIC BUT THAT BY ITSELF IS NOT SUFFICIENT REASON TO BRAND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST S OF THE REVENUE. THE SCOPE OF INTERFERENCE UNDER SECTION 263 IS NOT TO SET ASIDE MERELY UNFAVOURABLE ORDERS AND BRING TO TAX SOME MORE MONEY TO THE TREASURY NOR IS THE SECTION MEANT TO GET AT SH EER ESCAPEMENT OF REVENUE WHICH IS TAKEN CARE OF BY OTHER PROVISIONS IN THE ACT. POWER UNDER SECTION 263 CANNOT BE EXERCISED FOR STARTING FISHING AND ROVING ENQUIRIES. IN THE GARB OF EXERCISING POWER UNDER SECTION 263 THE COMMISSIONER CANNOT INITIATE PROC EEDINGS WITH A VIEW TO STARTING FISHING AND ROVING ENQUIRIES IN MATTERS OR ORDERS WHICH ARE ALREADY CONCLUDED. WE FIND THAT THE CIT HAS RELIED UPON THE FINDINGS OF HON BLE GWAHATI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. JAWAHAR BHATTACHARJEE REPORTED IN 342 ITR 74 . THE FACTS OF THE AFORESAID CASE ARE CLEARLY DISTINGUISHABLE FROM THE FACTS OF THE CASE UNDER CONSIDERATION. INASMUCH AS IN THE PRESENT CASE NEITHER THERE IS AN INCORRECT ASSUMPTION OF FACTS NOR THERE IS AN INCORRECT APPLICATION OF LAW WHICH WOULD S ET ASIDE THE REQUIREMENT OF THE ORDER BEING ERRONEOUS. IT WOULD BE PERTINENT TO MENTION THE LAST PARAGRAPH OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WHICH READ S AS UNDER : - THE ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED WITH THE PRIOR APPROVABLE OF ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTR AL) RANGE - 10 MUMBAI VIDE HIS LETTER NO. ADDL.CIT/CR.10/APPROVAL/SEARCH ASSTT./25/2010 - 11 DATED 27/12/20 10. . ITA NO S . 4148 TO 4152 / 1 3 & 3966 - 3969/13 10 THIS CLEARLY SHOW S THAT NOT ONLY THE AO HAS APPLIED HIS MIND ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE BUT ALSO IT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY HIS IMMEDIATE SUPERIOR A UTHORITY WHO HIMSELF MUST HAVE APPLIED HIS MIND BEFORE ACCORDING APPROVAL TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 12 . AFTER CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE FACTS AND THE MATERIAL EVIDENCE S BROUGHT ON RECORD REPRODUCED ELSE WHERE IN THE ORDER BY US IN OUR VIEW THE ORDER OF TH E CIT UNDER SECTION 263 OF THE ACT DOES NOT STAND ON ITS OWN LEG. WE ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT U/S 263 DATED 28 - 3 - 2013 AND RESTORE THA T OF THE AO. ASSESSEE SUCCEEDS . APPEALS ARE ALLOWED . 13 . NOW WE WILL TAKE UP APPEALS ( ITA NOS. 39 66 TO 3969/M/2013 ) FILED BY THE ASSESSEE M/S STANDARD CONDUITS PVT. LTD . FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004 - 05 TO 2007 - 08. 14 . T HE IMPUGNED ORDER IN THE AFORESAID APPEALS IS DATED 30 - 3 - 2013 WHICH HAS BEEN PASSED BY THE CIT UNDER SECTION 263 WHEREIN THE CIT HA S INVOKED HIS JURISDICTION FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004 - 05 2005 - 06 2006 - 07 & 2007 - 08 RESPECTIVELY. 15 . SIMILAR ISSUE WAS ALSO INVOLVED IN APPEALS OF ASSESSEE I.E. M/S TURAKHIA FERROMET PVT. LTD (ITA NOS. 4148 TO 4152/M/2013 ) WHEREIN W E HAVE ALREADY GIV EN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE SUBMISSIONS ADVANCED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS BY LEARNED DR AND CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE FACTS AND THE MATERIAL EVIDENCE S BROUGHT ITA NO S . 4148 TO 4152 / 1 3 & 3966 - 3969/13 11 ON RECORD WE HAVE ALREADY ALLOWED THE APPEALS OF THE AFORESAID ASSESSEE BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT UNDER SECTION 263 OF THE ACT. THEREFORE FOLLOWING OUR OWN DECISION GIVEN IN THE AFORESAID APPEALS WE ALSO ALLOW THE PRESENT APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE NAMELY M/S STANDARD CONDUITS PVT. LTD. AND SET ASI DE THE ORDER DATED 30 - 3 - 2013 OF THE CIT UNDER SECTION 263. 16 . RESULTANTLY ALL THE APPEAL S OF BOTH THE ASSESSEES ARE ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31/10/ 2013 . SD/ - ( ) ( H.L.KARWA ) SD/ - ( ) ( N.K.BILLAIYA ) / PRESIDENT / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 31/10 / 2013 /PKM PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / THE CIT(A) MUMBAI. 4. / CIT 5. / DR ITAT MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER ( A SSTT. REGISTRAR) / ITAT MUMBAI