Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
आदेश/Order
Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:
These are cross appeals one by the Revenue and the other by the assessee filed against the order dated 19.01.2016 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patiala [hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)]. First we take the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No. 252/Chd/2016.
2 ITA Nos. 252 & 267/Chd/2016- Sh. Mahesh Kumar Singla, Patiala
ITA No. 252/Chd/2016 – Revenue’s appeal
At the outset, the Ld. DR has been fair enough to admit that the tax
effect involved in Revenue’s appeal is less than the prescribed limit of Rs.
20 lacs for filing the appeal before the Tribunal as per CBDT Circular No.
3/2018 dated 11.7.2018. In view of this, he seeks to withdraw / not to
press the present appeal in the light of the aforesaid CBDT Circular dated
11.7.2018.
Request allowed. The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as
‘withdrawn / not pressed’.
ITA No. 267/Chd/2016 – Assessee’s appeal
Now coming to the assessee’s appeal, the sole issue raised in the
appeal is regarding the claim of loss suffered by the assessee on account of
theft of transformers. The Ld. CIT(A) disallowed the said loss observing
that the assessee failed to prove the actual value of the transformers at the
time of the said theft. In this case, the assessee had claimed the loss as per
the cost price of the transformers. It was explained that since the books of
the assessee were lying impounded with the Assessing officer, hence, the
assessee was unable to furnish the details regarding the book value of the
transformers at the time of theft. The Ld. CIT(A), however, did not
consider the above submissions of the assessee and held that burden was
upon the assessee to prove the actual value of the transformers at the time
of theft and that the assessee was not supposed to shift his burden on the
Department. He, therefore, disallowed the entire loss claimed by the
3 ITA Nos. 252 & 267/Chd/2016- Sh. Mahesh Kumar Singla, Patiala
assessee and made the impugned addition of Rs. 26,83,600/- to the income
of the assessee.
Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee has come in appeal
before us.
At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited our attention
to the impugned order of the CIT(A) and has stated that the books of
account even as on date are still lying / impounded with the Assessing
officer, hence, the assessee was unable to furnish the details sought by the
CIT(A). He has further submitted that the factum of theft of transformers
has not been disputed by the Department. In view of this, the Ld. CIT(A)
was not justified in disallowing the entire claim of the loss.
On the last date of hearing i.e. 26.9.2018, a specific question was
raised by the Bench to the Ld. DR as to despite framing of the assessment
order and even after passing of the order by the first appellate authority, why the books of account of the assessee are still lying impounded with the Assessing officer. The concerned Assessing officer was called upon to
explain in this respect vide order dated 26.9.2018. Today, Shri Kamaldeep
Singh, the concerned Assessing officer has come present and has stated
that he has recently joined and was not aware of the impounding of the
books by his predecessor. However, after going through the records, he has
submitted that the books of account of the assessee are liable to be
released and he has given an undertaking that the same will be released at
the earliest possible.
Now coming the merits of the case, the theft of the transformers has
not been disputed as the assessee has furnished sufficient evidence in this
4 ITA Nos. 252 & 267/Chd/2016- Sh. Mahesh Kumar Singla, Patiala
regard. The only question is regarding the quantum of loss suffered by the assessee. The assessee could not furnish the necessary details because of the reasons that his books of account were lying impounded with the Assessing officer. In view of this, as submitted by both the Ld. representatives of the parties, it will be appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case to restore this issue to the file of the Assessing officer to decide it a fresh after giving opportunity to the assessee to furnish the necessary details. The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 11.10.2018.
Sd/- Sd/- (अ�नपूणा� गु�ता / ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (संजय गग� / SANJAY GARG) लेखा सद�य/ Accountant Member �या�यक सद�य/ Judicial Member
Dated : 11.10.2018 “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