ITO, Bangalore v. M/s Hi- Tech Pneumatics & Heat Treaters Pvt. Ltd.,, Bangalore

ITA 782/BANG/2010 | 2002-2003
Pronouncement Date: 03-01-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 78221114 RSA 2010
Bench Bangalore
Appeal Number ITA 782/BANG/2010
Duration Of Justice 6 month(s) 22 day(s)
Appellant ITO, Bangalore
Respondent M/s Hi- Tech Pneumatics & Heat Treaters Pvt. Ltd.,, Bangalore
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 03-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 03-01-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 21-12-2010
Next Hearing Date 21-12-2010
Assessment Year 2002-2003
Appeal Filed On 11-06-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 782/BANG/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2002-03 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 11(2) BANGALORE. : APPELLANT VS. M/S. HI-TECH PNEUMATICS & HEAT TREATERS PVT. LTD. V-34(A) 7 TH MAIN IIND STAGE PEENYA INDUSTRIAL AREA BANGALORE 560 058. : RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SMT. JACINTA ZIMIK VASHAI ADDL. CIT (DR) RESPONDENT BY : NONE O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A)-I BANGALORE IN ITA NOS: 275 276 277 & 89/ W-11(2)/A-I/07-08 DATED: 11.3.2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 [CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE AYS.2001-02 TO 04-05] IN THE CASE OF M/S. HI-TECH PNEUMATICS & HEAT TREATERS PVT. LTD. BANGALORE. ITA NO.782/BANG/10 PAGE 2 OF 5 2. THE REVENUE HAD RAISED FOUR GROUNDS IN WHICH GROUND NOS.1 AND 4 BEING GENERAL AND NO SPECIFIC ISSUES INVOLVED TH EY HAVE BECOME NON- CONSEQUENTIAL. IN THE REMAINING GROUNDS THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE WAS THAT THE CIT (A) HAD ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITIONS MA DE ON ACCOUNT OF UNDER-VALUATION OF EXCISABLE GOODS AND SUPPRESSI ON OF SALES RELYING ON THE ORDER OF THE CUSTOMS EXCISE AND SERV ICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. 3. BRIEFLY STATED THE ASSESSEE COMPANY [T HE ASSESSEE IN SHORT] WAS ENGAGED IN THE MANUFACTURE AND SALE OF DTH HAMMERS/ BUTTON BITS. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER DISPUTE AN ADDITION OF R S.6.08 LAKHS WAS MADE BY THE AO [FOR THE REASONS SET-OUT IN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER] ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE ZONAL DI RECTOR GENERAL DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF CENTRAL EXCISE INTELLIGENCE ZONAL UNIT BANGALORE TO THE EFFECT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RESORTED TO GROSS UNDER-VALUATION OF EXCISABLE GOODS BY SHOWING LESSER VALUES IN ITS INV OICES RESULTING IN EVASION OF INCOME-TAX ALSO. 4. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE TOOK UP THE ISSU E WITH THE CIT (A) FOR SOLACE. IT WAS CONTENDED BEFORE THE FIRST APPE LLATE AUTHORITY AMONG OTHERS THAT IN RESPECT OF THE FINDING OF THE CENTR AL EXCISE INTELLIGENCE ZONE UNIT TO THE EFFECT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD INDULGED IN EVASION OF DUTY BY RESORTING TO GROSS UNDER-VALUE OF EXCISABLE GOODS M ANUFACTURE AND CLEARED BY SHOWING LESSER VALUE IN THE INVOICE AND COLLECTE D REMAINING AMOUNTS IN CASH ETC. THE ASSESSEE TOOK UP THE ISSUE WITH COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE WHO CONFIRMED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITY. HOWEVER THE HONBLE CUSTOMS EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLAT E TRIBUNAL [CESTAT] ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE WHILE DISPOSING OF THE A SSESSEES APPEAL VIDE ITA NO.782/BANG/10 PAGE 3 OF 5 ITS ORDER IN APPEAL NOS: 165 TO 167 OF 2006 DATED 2 5.11.2009 OBSERVED THUS: SO LONG AS THE REVENUE HAS NOT BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN PROVIDING THAT THE ACTUAL BUYER HAD PAID AN AMOUNT MUCH MORE THAN THE VALUE SHOWN IN THE INVOICE ISSUED AT THE TIME OF REMOVAL OF GOODS FROM THE FACTORY THE ALLEGATION OF UNDER-VALUATION SHOULD F AIL AND NO DEMAND ON THAT BASIS CAN BE SUSTAINED 4.1. TAKING SANCTUARY UNDER THE FINDING O F HONBLE CESTAT CITED SUPRA THE ASSESSEE VEHEMENTLY ARGUED BEFORE THE LD . CIT (A) THAT THERE WAS NO CASE FOR MAKING ANY ADDITION BY THE AO AS TH E ALLEGED EVASION OF DUTY BY SHOWING GROSS UNDER-VALUATION OF EXCISABLE GOODS MANUFACTURED ETC. WAS STRUCK DOWN BY THE HONBLE CESTAT. 4.2. AFTER DUE CONSIDERATION OF THE ASSESSE ES CONTENTIONS AND ALSO IN CONFORMITY WITH THE FINDING OF THE HONBLE CESTAT THE CIT (A) DELETED THE ADDITION. 5. AGITATED THE REVENUE HAS COME UP WITH THE PRESENT APPEAL. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THE LD. D R WAS VERY FIRM IN HER URGE THAT AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE ISSUE THE AO HAD WORKED OUT THE ADDITIONAL GROSS PROFIT AT RS.6.08 LAKHS WHICH WAS DULY ADDED TO THE ASSESSEES INCOME. IN FURTHERANCE IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT (I) THE CIT (A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNDER-VALUATION OF EXCISABLE GOODS AND SUPPRESSION OF SALES RELYING ONLY ON THE ORDER OF THE CUSTOMS EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT T HE MATTER HAD NOT REACHED FINALITY; & (II) THAT HE HAD FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THOU GH THE INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED FROM CENTRAL EXCISE DEPART MENT THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED BASED ON INDEPENDENT F INDINGS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ITA NO.782/BANG/10 PAGE 4 OF 5 IT WAS THEREFORE VOCIFEROUSLY PLEADED THAT THE ST AND OF THE AO REQUIRES TO BE SUBSTANTIATED. 5.1. ON THE OTHER HAND NONE WAS PRESENT O N BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE TO PORTRAY ITS STAND ON THE ISSUE. 6. WE HAVE DULY CONSIDERED THE S UBMISSION OF THE REVENUE AND ALSO METICULOUSLY PERUSED THE RELEVANT CASE REC ORDS. 6.1. AT THE OUT-SET WE WOULD LIKE TO POIN T OUT THAT ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION TO THE EFFECT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD INDULGED IN EVASION OF DUTY ETC. FROM THE CENTRAL EXCISE DEPARTMENT; THE AO HAD DETE RMINED THE ADDITION AS RECORDED IN HIS IMPUGNED ORDER UNDER CO NSIDERATION. HOWEVER THE HONBLE CESTAT IN ITS FINDINGS CITED SUPRA HA D EMPHATICALLY RULED THAT THE ALLEGATION OF UNDER-VALUATION SHOULD FAIL AND NO DEMAND ON THAT BASIS CAN BE SUSTAINED. THUS THE INFORMATION - ALLEGED EVASION OF DUTY BY RESORTING TO UNDER-VALUATION OF EXCISABLE GOODS MAN UFACTURED ETC. HAS BEEN STRUCK DOWN BY THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL CITED SUPRA - ON THE BASIS OF WHICH ADDITION MADE BY THE AO AS RIGHTLY HIGHLIGHTED BY THE LD. CIT (A) IN HIS IMPUGNED ORDER UNDER DISPUTE IN OUR CONSIDERED VIE W DOESNT STAND THE TESTIMONY OF LAW. WE ARE THEREFORE OF THE FIRM VIEW THAT THE STAND OF THE LD. CIT (A) DOESNT REQUIRE ANY INTERFERENCE AT THI S STAGE. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 7. IN THE RESULT THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED . ITA NO.782/BANG/10 PAGE 5 OF 5 PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 3 RD DAY OF JANUARY 2011. SD/- SD/- ( SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE DATED THE 3 RD JANUARY 2011. DS/- COPY TO: BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT BANGALORE. 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ITAT BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE