ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C-4(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SML ISUZU LIMITED, CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1425/CHANDI/2018Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 March 2019AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the issue was covered by its own previous decision in the assessee's own case. The Tribunal found no justification for the addition as no excise duty was paid on closing work in progress, and even if included, it would not result in a difference.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s deletion of additions made by the Assessing Officer. The additions were related to loading excise duty on the closing stock of work in progress.

What were the issues?

Whether excise duty on closing stock of work in progress should be added to the value of closing stock.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 145A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

आदेश/Order Per Bench:

The present appeals have been preferred by the Revenue against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Chandigarh dated 12.09.2018.

2.

The sole issue involved in both the appeals is relating to the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the additions made by the Assessing officer by invoking of the provisions of section 145A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') by loading excise duty on closing stock of work in progress.

ITA Nos. 1424 & 1425/Chd/2018- M/s Shimla Isuzu Ltd, Chandigarh 2

3.

At the outset, both the Ld. representatives of the parties have

submitted that the issue is now squarely covered by the decision of the

Tribunal in the own case of the assessee vide common order dated

14.5.2018 of the Tribunal in ITA No. 79/Chd/2009 for assessment year

2005-06 & Ors., wherein, the Tribunal while adjudicating the issue has

concluded as under:-

“30. We have considered the rival contentions. In the case in hand, the assessee has not paid any excise duty on the closing work in progress and hence there was no question of loading any excise duty on estimation basis. Even otherwise, if the value of the excise duty has to be included in the closing stock then the value of excise duty has also to be included in the opening stock and in that event there would be no difference in the result of the value of the opening stock and closing stock. Reliance in this respect is placed on the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of ‘Purolator India Ltd.’ (supra) and of the Allahabad High Court in the case of ‘CIT Vs. Sangam Structurals Ltd.’ (2013) 35 taxman.com 148 (All.) In view of this, we do not find any justification in making the aforesaid addition. We, therefore, uphold the decision of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition on this issue. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed.”

4.

In view of this, the issue is squarely covered by the above decision

dated 14.5.2018 (supra) of the Tribunal. Therefore, we do not find any

infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) while deleting the impugned additions.

There is no merit in the aforesaid appeals of the Revenue and the same are

accordingly dismissed.

5.

No other issue or point was raised or argued.

ITA Nos. 1424 & 1425/Chd/2018- M/s Shimla Isuzu Ltd, Chandigarh 3

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed. Order dictated and pronounced in the Open Court immediately on completion of hearing.

Sd/- Sd/- (अ�नपूणा� गु�ता / ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (संजय गग� / SANJAY GARG) लेखा सद�य/ Accountant Member �या�यक सद�य/ Judicial Member

Dated : 20.03.2019 “आर.के.”

आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त/ CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य आ�धकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File

आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar

More judgments on Section 145A

All 656 judgments and leading authorities on Section 145A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →