ITO, JANJGIR CHAMPA vs. M/S. B.P. ISPAT PVT. LTD., JANJGIR CHAMPA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 35/BIL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 January 2018AY 2010-115 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee claimed to have maintained books of account, and the revenue challenged the CIT(A)'s decision without allowing the AO to verify them. Therefore, the matter was remitted to the AO for verification.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a private limited company, filed a return declaring NIL income. The Assessing Officer (AO) rejected the books of account for non-production and estimated Net Profit at 6.99% on turnover. The CIT(A) partly allowed the assessee's appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in modifying the AO's conclusion without allowing the AO to verify the assessee's books of account.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 145

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR

Before: S/SHRI N.S SAINI & PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Appellant: Shri G.S.Agrawal, AR
For Respondent: Shri O.P.Chaudhary, DR, Shri G.S.Agrawal, AR
Hearing: 18/01Pronounced: 19/01

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR

BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.35/Rpr/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-2011

ITO, Janjgir Chapma B.P.Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Hatri Chowk, Sakti, Janjgir Champa, PAN/GIR No. AACCB7644N (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

Cross Objection No.02/Rpr/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-2011

B.P.Ispat Pvt. Ltd. ITO, Janjgir Chapma Vs. Hatri Chowk, Sakti, Janjgir Champa, PAN/GIR No. AACCB7644N (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

Revenue by : Shri O.P.Chaudhary, DR Assessee by : Shri G.S.Agrawal, AR

Date of Hearing : 18/01/ 2018 Date of Pronouncement : 19/01/ 2018

O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, JM This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the CIT(A)-

Raipur, dated 07.11.2014 for the assessment year 2010-2011 and the

assessee has filed cross objection.

2.

The revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:-

1.

Whether the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) without bringing any material on record in the form of Books of Accounts and Vouchers was justified to change the conclusion drawn by the AO for estimating the Net Profit.

2.

Whether the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) was justified to decide the issue without affording the opportunity to the AO as to why all expenditure in P&L A/c are to be allowed.

3.

Whether the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) was justified in passing the cryptic order by not showing the admission of any fresh evidence under Rule 46A.

3.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a private limited

company engaged in manufacturing of steel bars of different types from

ingots purchased from various steel plants. Return of income for the A.Y.

2010-11 was filed on 06-10-2010 declaring total income at NIL and loss of

Rs. 78.18,680/- carried forward to next following year. The case was

selected for scrutiny and therefore, the AO issued notice u/s 143(2) and

143(1) OR 10-10-2011. Due to change of incumbent, fresh notice was issued

u/s 143(2) and 142(1) along-with questionnaire on 27-11-2012. As per the

Assessing Officer, in response to the above notices and notices issued on

subsequent dates, though the counsel of the assessee appeared from time

to time and made necessary compliances but books of account and other

documents are not produced though claimed to have been audited,

maintained and kept. In absence of books of account and other documents,

the AO could not verify the correctness of the book result and therefore, after invoking provisions of section 145, he rejected the books of account

and completed the assessment by applying G.P. @ 6.99% on a turnover of

Rs. 2;34,88,651/-.

4.

Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee carried the matter in

appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) considered the grounds raised by the

assessee and also the findings of the Assessing Officer and decided the issue

by modifying the order of the Assessing Officer and also the fact remains

that the CIT(A) has called for remand report and the assessee did not make

any cross objection to the report of the Assessing Office as referred in page

2 of the order. Therefore, the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal.

5.

Being aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us.

6.

Ld D.R. submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in allowing the appeal in

part without considering the fact that the assessee never produced the

books of account before the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) has not

provided an opportunity to the Assessing Officer to verify the documents,

which the assessee relied on in the course of appellate proceedings.

7.

Ld A.R. submitted that the assessee has maintained books of account

and produced the same which is referred in the written submission dated

19.3.2013 page 4 & 5 of PB and dated 6.11.2012 at page 6 & 7.

7.

We, on perusal of the assessment order, found that the Assessing

Officer has given a categorical finding that the assessee has maintained the

books of account but they were not produced in the course of assessment

proceeding and ld A.R. substantiated that books of account are available.

Considering the apparent facts and materials on record, we are of the

opinion that the books of accounts are available with the assessee and the

fact that the revenue is challenging the action of the CIT(A) in not providing

the Assessing officer to verify the books of account. In such circumstances,

we are of the substantive opinion that the matter has to be remitted to the

Assessing Officer to verify and examine the books of account of the

assessee. The assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of

hearing.

8.

As we have remitted the matter to the file of the Assessing officer in

the revenue’s appeal, the cross objection of the assessee is also restored to

the file of the Assessing Officer.

9.

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by

the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 19 /01/2018. Sd/- sd/- (N.S Saini) (Pavan Kumar Gadale) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIALMEMBER Raipur; Dated 19 /01/2018 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : ITO, Janjgir Chapma 2. The Respondent. .P.Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Hatri Chowk, Sakti, Janjgir Champa, 3. The CIT(A)-Bilaspur 4. Pr.CIT-Bilaspur 5. DR, ITAT, Raipur 6. Guard file. //True Copy//

BY ORDER,

SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, Raipur

More judgments on Section 145

All 1,584 judgments and leading authorities on Section 145 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →