ACIT, Ambala v. M/s Micro Instruments Company, Ambala Cantt.

ITA 420/CHANDI/2011 | 2008-2009
Pronouncement Date: 27-07-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 42021514 RSA 2011
Assessee PAN AAOFM8899I
Bench Chandigarh
Appeal Number ITA 420/CHANDI/2011
Duration Of Justice 3 month(s) 5 day(s)
Appellant ACIT, Ambala
Respondent M/s Micro Instruments Company, Ambala Cantt.
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 27-07-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 27-07-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 18-07-2011
Next Hearing Date 18-07-2011
Assessment Year 2008-2009
Appeal Filed On 21-04-2011
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI D.K.SRIVASTAVA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS.SUSHMA CHOWLA JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 420/CHD/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) THE A.C.I.T. VS. M/S MICRO INSTRUMENTS COMPANY CIRCLE AMBALA. 8 INDUSTRIAL AREA AMBALA CANTT. PAN: AAOFM8899I (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.K.MITTAL DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUDHIR SEHGAL O R D E R PER SUSHMA CHOWLA J.M : THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS AGAINST THE ORDE R OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(A) DATED 15.02.2011 REL ATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT 1961. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE AS UNDER : 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) IS RIGHT IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE U/S 145(3) AT RS.3 00 64 348/- BY IGNORING THE FACT THAT INVOKING OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145 (3) WERE VALIDLY INVOKED AS THE ASSESSE E DID NOT MAINTAIN INVENTORY OF OPENING AND CLOSING STOCK WITHOUT WHICH IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO DETERMINE THE CORRECT INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION? 2 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) IS RIGHT IN HOLDING THAT DEDUCTION U/S 80IB AMOUNTING TO RS.3 39 764/- IN RESPECT OF NEW UNIT WAS ADMISSIBLE NOTWITHSTANDING THAT THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN U/S 80IB ARE NOT SATISFIED AND NO DEDUCTION HAS BEEN ALLOWED IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04? 3. THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT TH AT THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL ARE IDENTICAL TO THE ISSUES R AISED IN THE EARLIER YEARS AND THE SAME STAND COVERED BY THE ORDERS OF T HE TRIBUNAL STARTING FROM ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 TO 2006-07. IT WAS A LSO POINTED OUT BY THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE CIT(A) H AD ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN THE EARLIER YEARS. 4. THE LEARNED D.R. FOR THE REVENUE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE ISSUE IN GROUND NO.1 IS AGAINST THE DELETION OF ADD ITION MADE BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145(3) OF THE AC T. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD MADE THE ADDITION OF RS.3 00 64 348/- O N ACCOUNT OF LOW GROSS PROFIT RATE AND ALSO IN THE ABSENCE OF THE OP ENING AND CLOSING STOCK INVENTORY. THE ASSESSEE WAS SHOWING CONSTANTLY DEC LINE IN THE GP RATE FROM ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03 TO 2008-09 AS TABULAT ED AT PAGE 2 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE REJECTED UNDER SECTION 145 (3) OF THE ACT AND ADDIT ION WAS MADE BY APPLYING GP RATE AT 30% ON TOTAL SALE OF RS.27.78 C RORES AS AGAINST GP RATE OF 19.19% DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSES SING OFFICER ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CA SE DELETED THE AFORESAID ADDITION BUT AS THE DEPARTMENT HAS FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE 3 HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT ON THE ISSUE WH ICH WAS PENDING AN ADDITION OF RS.3 00 64 348/- WAS MADE. THE CIT( A) ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THERE WAS NO NEW FACTS AND ALLOWED THE CLAIM O F THE ASSESSEE IN VIEW OF THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2003-04. 6. WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL IN I.T.A.NO. 129/CHAND I/2007 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 VIDE ORDER DATED 31.7.2008 HAD ELABORATED UPON THE ISSUE INVOKING OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145 (3) OF THE ACT AND REJECTION OF TRADING RESULTS DECLARED BY THE ASSESS EE VIDE PARA 13 OF ITS ORDER AND HAD ACCEPTED THE EXPLANATION RENDERED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH REGARD TO FALL IN GP RATE BEING PLAUSIBLE AND HAD A CCORDINGLY DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY COMPUTING THE GROSS PROFIT ON ESTI MATE BASIS. THE SAID RATIO WAS APPLIED IN ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05 AND 2 005-06 IN I.T.A.NOS. 149 & 150/CHD/2008 (ORDER DATED 27.2.2009) AND FURT HER IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 IN I.T.A.NO. 537/CHD/2009 (ORDER DATED 24..6.2009). THE ADDITION IN THE IMPUGNED APPEAL WAS ALSO MADE BY TH E ASSESSING OFFICER IN VIEW OF THE EARLIER ADDITION MADE IN THE HANDS O F THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT(A) HAS OBSERVED THAT THE FACTS IN THE PRESENT C ASE ARE IDENTICAL TO THE FACTS IN THE PRECEDING YEARS AND THE DEPARTMENT HAS FAILED TO CONTROVERT THE ABOVE SAID FINDING OF CIT(A). THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE TRIBUNAL IS THUS APPLICABLE MUTATIS MUTANDIS. IN V IEW THEREOF WE FIND NO MERIT IN GROUND NO.1 RAISED BY THE REVENUE AND HENC E THE SAME IS DISMISSED. 7. THE ISSUE IN GROUND NO.2 RAISED BY THE REVENUE I S AGAINST THE ALLOWABILITY OF DEDUCTION CLAIMED UNDER SECTION 80I B OF THE ACT. WE FIND THAT SIMILAR ISSUE WAS RAISED BEFORE THE TRIBU NAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 WHERE THE TRIBUNAL (SUPPRA) VIDE ORDER DATED 31.7.2008 HAD HELD THE ASSESSEE EL IGIBLE FOR THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80 IB OF THE ACT. THE L EARNED D.R. FAILED TO 4 CONTROVERT THE FINDING OF THE CIT(A) THAT THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE ARE IDENTICAL TO THE FACTS IN THE PRECEDING YEARS. WE FIND NO MERIT IN THE GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE AND HENCE TH E SAME ARE DISMISSED. 8. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27 TH DAY OF JULY 2011. SD/- SD/- (D.K.SRIVASTAVA) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 27 TH JULY 2011 RATI COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT CHANDIGARH