ITO, Salem v. Senthil & Co.,, Omalur

MA 110/CHNY/2013 | 2007-2008
Pronouncement Date: 26-07-2013 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 11021724 RSA 2013
Assessee PAN AAFFS7670B
Bench Chennai
Appeal Number MA 110/CHNY/2013
Duration Of Justice 1 month(s) 16 day(s)
Appellant ITO, Salem
Respondent Senthil & Co.,, Omalur
Appeal Type Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date 26-07-2013
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted C
Assessment Year 2007-2008
Appeal Filed On 10-06-2013
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P.GEORGE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD JUDICIAL MEMBE R M.P. NO.110/MDS/2013 & ITA NO.535/MDS/2011 (IN ITA NO.535/MDS/2011) ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-II(2) SALEM. VS. M/S. SENTHIL & CO. PERIYERIPATTY POST THOLASAMPATTY (VIA) OMALUR TALUK. PAN:AAFFS7670B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : MR. S.DASGUPTA JCIT RESPONDENT BY : MR. S.SRIDHAR ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING : 26 TH JULY 2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26 TH JULY 2013 O R D E R PER CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD JM: THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED BY THE DEPARTM ENT STATING THAT ONE OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL I.E. GROU ND NO.5 IS NOT DISPOSED OFF BY THE TRIBUNAL WHILE DECIDING THE APPEAL IN ITA NO.535/MDS/2011 BY ORDER DATED 23 RD JANUARY 2013. 2. WE HAVE PERUSED THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE REVENUE AND FIND THAT GROUND NO.5 OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS NOT ADJUDICATED WHILE DISPOSING O FF THE APPEAL IN ITA NO.535/MDS/2011 VIDE ORDER DATED 23.0 1.2013. M.P.NO.110 /MDS/2013 & ITA NO.535/MDS/2011 2 THERE IS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD IN NOT DISP OSING OFF GROUND NO.5 OF THE REVENUES APPEAL. THEREFORE WE RECALL OUR ORDER IN ITA NO.535/MDS/2011 DATED 23.01.2013 TO THAT EXTENT AND DISPOSE OFF THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REV ENUE. 3. GROUND NO.5 OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE REVE NUE IS AS FOLLOWS:- THE CIT (A) ERRED IN NETTING OFF OF CREDITS AND DEBITS STANDING IN THE NAME OF BMP INDUSTRIES & SRI KANTESWARA. IF THE CIT (A) BELIEVED THAT CREDIT S ARE NOT GENUINE THEN THE PEAK OF THE SAME OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN CONFIRMED. THE CIT (A) OUGHT TO HAVE CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE AO. 4. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSES SMENT MADE ADDITION OF ` 9 00 086/- AS UNEXPLAINED CREDIT UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESS EE HAS NOT FURNISHED ADEQUATE DETAILS IN RESPECT OF THE SUNDRY CREDITORS NAMELY BMP INDUSTRIES AND SRI KANDESWARA STONE CRUS HING INDUSTRY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE A SSESSEE HAS NOT PRODUCED ANY DETAILS INCLUDING CONFIRMATION FROM THE ABOVE CREDITORS EVEN THE COMPLETE ADDRESSES OF THE SUNDRY CREDITORS WERE ALSO NOT PRODUCED. THE ASSESSING OFF ICER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEES REPRESENTATIVE REPLIED THAT IT IS M.P.NO.110 /MDS/2013 & ITA NO.535/MDS/2011 3 NOT POSSIBLE TO GET CONFIRMATION FROM THESE SUNDRY CREDITORS. ON APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX (APPEALS) ON EXAMINING THE BALANCE SHEET AND BOOKS PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE HELD THAT THESE CREDITORS I.E. BMP INDUSTRIES AND SRI KANDESWARA STONE CRUSHING INDUST RY ARE HAVING DEBIT BALANCES IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THEREFORE HELD THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE IS HAVING D EBIT BALANCES AND CREDIT BALANCES THE DEBITS BALANCES HA VE TO BE ADJUSTED AGAINST THE CREDIT BALANCES AND NET CREDIT BALANCE ONLY IS TO BE CONSIDERED FOR ADDITION UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. 5. THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUPPORTED THE O RDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING ADDITION UNDER S ECTION 68 OF THE ACT. 6. THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). 7. HEARD BOTH SIDES. ON GOING THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WE FIND THAT THE M.P.NO.110 /MDS/2013 & ITA NO.535/MDS/2011 4 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAD IN FACT SU STAINED THE ADDITION ONLY TO THE NET CREDIT BALANCE AFTER A DJUSTING THE DEBIT BALANCES APPEARING IN THE NAMES OF THE CREDIT ORS. THEREFORE WE DO NOT FIND ANY GOOD REASON TO INTERF ERE WITH THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA X (APPEALS) IN DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO CON SIDER ONLY THE NET CREDIT BALANCE FOR ADDITION UNDER SECTION 6 8 OF THE ACT. THE GROUND NO.5 RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN ITA NO.535/MDS/2011 IS REJECTED. 8. IN THE RESULT THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED ITA NO.535/MDS/2011 IS RECALLED AND TH E SAME IS DISMISSED ACCORDINGLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON FRIDAY TH E 26 TH DAY OF JULY 2013 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (ABRAHAM P.GEORGE ) (CHALLA NA GENDRA PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI DATED THE 26 TH JULY 2013. SOMU COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT (4 ) CIT(A) (2) RESPONDENT (5) D.R. (3) CIT (6) G.F.