The ACIT, Circle 1, RAJKOT-GUJARAT v. Shri Ghanshyambhai G Vaidya, GONDAL

ITA 842/RJT/2010 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 29-07-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 84224914 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN ABOPV5325J
Bench Rajkot
Appeal Number ITA 842/RJT/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
Appellant The ACIT, Circle 1, RAJKOT-GUJARAT
Respondent Shri Ghanshyambhai G Vaidya, GONDAL
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 29-07-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 29-07-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 26-07-2011
Next Hearing Date 26-07-2011
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 15-04-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH RAJKOT BEFORE SHRI A.L. GEHLOT (AM) AND SHRI N.R.S. GANESA N (JM) I.T.A. NO.842/RJT/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07) ACIT CIR.1 VS SHRI GHANSHYAMBHAI J VAIDYA RAJKOT MAHADEV WADI GONDAL PAN : ABOPV5325J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI MK SINGH ASSESSEE BY : SHRI DM RINDANI O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN JM THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-I RAJKOT DATED 29-01-2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS WITH REGARD TO THE ADDITION OF RS. 37 88 611 ON ACCOUNT OF LOW GROSS PROFIT. 3. SHRI MK SINGH THE LD.DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSE SSING OFFICER FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN THE GROSS PROFIT AT 56.16%. ACCORDINGLY HE MADE ADDITION OF 13% GROSS PROFIT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CON SIDERATION. HOWEVER THE CIT(A) FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ACTUALLY SHOWN 7 7% GROSS PROFIT WHICH IS MUCH HIGHER THAN THE RATE OF 69.99% ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE ACCORDING TO THE LD.DR THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE REMANDED THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR EXAMI NATION. HOWEVER WITHOUT ITA NO.842/RJT/2010 2 REMANDING THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESS ING HE DELETED THE ADDITION. THE ONLY OBJECTION OF THE LD.DR IS THAT THE MATTER OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN REMANDED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. SHRI DM RINDANI THE LD.REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE A SSESSEE ON THE OTHER HAND SUBMITTED THAT HE IS PLACING HIS RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAV E ALSO PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ASSESSING OFFICE R PROCEEDED ON THE FOOTING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN THE GROSS PROFIT AT 56.16%. THEREFORE HE MADE ADDITION OF 13% TO IT. ON EXAMINATION THE CIT(A) F OUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ACTUALLY SHOWN THE GROSS PROFIT AT 77%. THE GROSS PROFIT ESTIMATED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER EVEN AFTER MAKING ADDITION OF 13% COMES TO ONLY 69.99%. THEREFORE THE CIT(A) FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HIMSE LF HAS SHOWN HIGHER GROSS PROFIT RATE THAN THE ONE ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSING O FFICER. THE ONLY CONTENTION OF THE LD.DR IS THAT THE MATTER OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN REM ANDED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE-EXAMINATION. IT IS AN ADM ITTED FACT THAT THE CIT(A) HAS CO- TERMINUS POWER WITH THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE IT IS NOT NECESSARY FOR THE CIT(A) TO CALL FOR A REMAND REPORT IN EVERY CASE. THE CIT(A) CAN EXAMINE HIMSELF ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE BEFORE H IM AND TAKE A DECISION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. ONCE THE CIT(A) IN EXERCISE O F HIS POWERS EXAMINED THE MATTER AND DECIDED THE ISSUE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER I T IS FOR THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO POINT OUT THE MISTAKE COMMITTED BY THE CIT(A) BEFOR E THIS TRIBUNAL. MERELY BECAUSE THE CIT(A) HAS NOT CALLED FOR A REMAND REPO RT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALONE CANNOT BE A REASON TO FIND FAULT WITH THE ORD ER OF THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) IN ITA NO.842/RJT/2010 3 CATEGORICAL TERMS FOUND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER ESTIMATED THE PROFIT ONLY AT 69.99% EVEN AFTER ADDING 13% TO THE PROFIT SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN GROSS PROFIT RATE AT 77%. THIS FACTUAL FINDING OF THE CIT(A) WAS NOT CONTROVERTED BY THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTA TIVE. THIS IS THE FACTUAL POSITION. THEREFORE WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITY IS CONFIRMED. 6. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29-07-2011. SD/- SD/- (A.L. GEHLOT) (N.R.S. GANESAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER RAJKOT DT : 29 TH JULY 2011 PK/- COPY TO: 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. THE CIT(A)-I RAJKOT 4. THE CIT-I RAJKOT 5. THE DR I.T.A.T. RAJKOT (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT RAJKOT