IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH "B" CHANDIGARH
BEFORE SHRI H.L. KARWA, VP AND SHRI T.R. SOOD, AM
Misc. Application No. 287/Chd/2006
Arising out of ITA Nos. 66 & 54/Chandi/2002
Assessment Year: 1998-99
The ITO, Vs M/s Jagdamba Rice & Genl Mills,
Nabha Nabha
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by : Shri Akhilesh Gupta
Respondent by : None
Date of hearing : 29.06.2012
Date of Pronouncement: 02.07.2012
ORDER
PER T.R. SOOD, A.M
Through this Misc. Application the Revenue has sought rectification of
mistake which has crept into the order of the Tribunal in ITA No. 54/Chandi/2002.
2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite service of notice. Since
the case has been posted on various occasions, therefore, we proceed it to hear
the Revenue's Misc. Application on ex.parte basis.
3. It has been pointed out that assessee has raised two grounds regarding
addition on account of under statement of sales in husk account amounting to Rs.
2,77,885/- and on account of under valuation of closing stock of husk at Rs.
24,649/- but the Tribunal has restricted the addition on account of closing stock to
Rs. 50,000/- which is not correct.
2
4. The Ld. DR referred to the ground of appeal raised by the assessee
reproduced in para 2 of the order of the Tribunal and pointed out that assessee
has challenged two additions namely understatement of sale in husk amounting to
Rs. 2,77,885/- and undervaluation of closing stock amounting to Rs. 24,649/-. The
Tribunal has adjudicated the issue vide ground Nos. 4 & 5 but through para 5, it
has been stated that ground regarding undervaluation of closing stock was not
pressed, therefore, the same was dismissed. In para 4.1 again, the discussion was
made in respect of closing stock only and the addition is restricted to Rs. 50,000/-
which is incorrect.
5. After considering the submissions of the Ld. DR and relevant materials on
record, we find that grounds of appeal filed by the assessee have been reproduced
by Tribunal in para 2, which reads as under:-
"1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has
erred in deleting the addition made in the income of the firm on
account of unexplained money brought by the partners viz. Smt.
Kaushalya Devi, Shri Pawan Kumar and Shri Paul Chand.
2. The Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in deleting the addition made in
the income of the firm of unexplained cash credit by Shri Ram
Kishan."
6. The issues have been adjudicated by the Tribunal vide para 4, 4.1 and 5,
which reads as under:-
"4. Coming to the cross-appeal by the assessee, in respect of
husk account, at the outset if was pointed out by Ld. AR that the
addition has been made by the Assessing Officer on account of
closing stock of husk which was made on estimate basis. He
submitted that if addition on account of closing stock is considered
3
then same should be carried forward to the opening stock of next
year. On the other hand, the Ld. DR heavily relied on the order of
the Assessing Officer and submitted that the plea of the assessee
that addition on account of closing stock should be considered for
carrying the opening stock of next year cannot be entertained, in
view of the fact that the same will disturb the subsequent result
shown by the assessee.
4.1 We after hearing both the parties and considering the above
fact that the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of
closing stock of husk was based on estimate and such estimate will
have a definite bearing on the closing stock shown in next year.
However, keeping in view the fact that the addition was made and
benefit of such addition has not been given in subsequent year, we
are of the opinion that a fair and reasonable addition of Rs.
50,000/- will meet the ends of justice. We, therefore, restrict the
addition of Rs. 50,000/- and accept the ground in part "
5. Second part of the ground regarding addition of Rs. 24,649/-
on account of undervaluation of closing stock of husk was not
pressed by ld AR before us. It is rejected as such."
7. The combined reading of above paras clearly show that addition in respect
of closing stock amounting to Rs. 24,649/- was not pressed and, therefore, the
same was decided against the assessee. In respect of other addition, the same
was restricted to Rs. 50,000/-. In the discussion, reference is made to closing
stock which seems to be erroneous. From the combined reading of the order it
seems that Tribunal wanted to confirm the addition of Rs. 50,000/- in the husk
account on account of under statement. Therefore, we rectify this mistake and
substitute para 4.1 as under:-
4
4.1 After hearing both the parties and considering the various
facts of the case, the addition on account of understatement of sales
in husk account is restricted to Rs. 50,000/-. This is because
assessee have shown the average rate of sale of husk at Rs. 72.9
per quintal whereas as per the information gathered by Assessing
Officer it is clear that Markfed had purchased husk in the range of
Rs. 93/- to Rs. 112.50 in various months during the assessment year
1998-99. Similarly, M/s Amrit Vanaspati Company Ltd and M/s
Punjab Maize Products Ltd have purchased the husk at higher rate,
therefore, in our opinion, addition of Rs. 50,000/- would meet the
ends of justice.
8. In the result, Misc. Application is allowed.
Order pronounced on 2.7.2012
Sd/- Sd/-
(H.L. KARWA) (T.R. SOOD)
VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated: 2nd July, 2012
rkk
Copy to: The Appellant/The Respondent/The CIT/The CIT(A)/ The DR
True Cop y
By Order
Assistant Registrar
|
