ORDNANCE FACTORY MEDAK CONSUMERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,MEDAK vs. ITO WARD 1 SANGAREDDY, SANGAREDDY

Coming to the assessee’s sole substantive grievance that the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in affirming the Assessing Officer’s action denying its maturity benefit thereby restraining 8% profit estimation coming to Rs.67,42,760/- pertaining to gas, fuel and other items to the extent of Rs.27,36,085/-, we note that the lower appellate discussion to this effect reads as under :

Learned counsel’s solitary argument before us is that the assessee has been wrongfully denied maturity benefit despite the fact that it had been carried out all its activities including running of petrol station for the benefit of its members only. The Revenue’s stand on the other hand is that the assessee had itself stated to have been running the fuel station for general public than for its members exclusive uses. We do not find any such statement coming from the assessee side along with corresponding by-laws and allotment conditions in the case files.

Faced with this situation, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant sole substantive ground back to the Assessing Officer for his appropriate adjudication within three effective opportunities of hearing subject to the condition that it itself fill all the necessary details.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the above terms.