Panchsheel Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd, Meerut v. ACIT, Meerut

ITA 1680/DEL/2009 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 29-01-2010 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 168020114 RSA 2009
Assessee PAN AABCP1158L
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 1680/DEL/2009
Duration Of Justice 9 month(s) 5 day(s)
Appellant Panchsheel Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd, Meerut
Respondent ACIT, Meerut
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 29-01-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted F
Tribunal Order Date 29-01-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 27-01-2010
Next Hearing Date 27-01-2010
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 24-04-2009
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH `F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.P. JAIN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.1680/DEL/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 PANCHSHEEL PHARMACEUTICALS (P) LTD. ASSTT. COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX 531 BEGUM BAGH MEERUT. VS. CIRCLE-2 MEERU T. PAN: AABCP1158L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUNIL KUMAR CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI H.K. LAL SR. DR. O R D E R PER B.P. JAIN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) MEERUT DATED 16.02.2009 PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 IN AN APP EAL AGAINST ASSESSMENT FRAMED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961 (THE ACT). 2. SINCE THE ISSUE INVOLVED IS IDENTICAL ALL THE G ROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE TAKEN TOGETHER. GROUND NOS. 1 TO 5 RE AD AS UNDER:- 1. THAT EACH GROUND OF APPEAL IS WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO EACH OTHER. 2 2. THAT THE LD. CIT WAS NOT CORRECT AND JUSTIFIED I N NOT DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.1 96 650/- AS PER FACTS AND CIRC UMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 3. THAT THE LD. CIT WAS NOT CORRECT AND JUSTIFIED I N SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS.1 96 650/-. 4. THAT THE APPELLANT RESERVED THE RIGHT TO ADD AM ENDS ALTER AND/OR DELETE ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 5. THAT ON THE BASIS OF FACTS OF THE CASE AND IN VI EW OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES IT IS PRAYED THAT EITHER THE ADDITION S SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT MAY PLEASE BE DELETED OR THE MATTER MAY PLEASE BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HA S RECEIVED COMMISSION OF RS.15 750/- AND RS.1 80 900/- TOTALING TO RS.1 9 6 650/- FROM M/S. PHARMACIA HEALTH CARE LTD. MUMBAI AS PER TDS CERTIF ICATE DATED 15.7.2003 AND 23.6.2004. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CREDITED THE I NCOME IN THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT AS OBSERVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THE TDS AS PER TDS CERTIFICATE. THE AO TH EREFORE INCLUDED THE SAID COMMISSION PAYMENT OF RS.1 96 650/- IN THE INC OME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE A.O. 3. IT WAS ARGUED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASS ESSEE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR THAT THE IS A CLEARING & FORWARDING AGENT MAI NLY FOR 2 COMPANIES WHERE SALARY PAID TO THE STAFF AND RENT PAID ARE RE IMBURSED TO SOME EXTENT AND BALANCE IS CHARGED TO THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT . THE COPY OF THE LEDGER 3 ACCOUNT OF THE SALARY AT PAGES 47 TO 54 RENT ACCOU NT AT PAGES 55-56 AND PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT AT PAGES 3 & 4 OF THE PAPER B OOK ARE AVAILABLE ON RECORD. HE INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO PAGES 5 TO 10 OF THE PAPER BOOK WHICH IS THE LEDGER ACCOUNT OF M/S. PHARMACIA HEALTH CARE LT D. WHERE CERTAIN EXPENSES INCURRED ON THEIR BEHALF ARE DIRECTLY DEBI TED TO THEIR ACCOUNT. THE BILLS ARE ALSO ISSUED IN THE NAME OF THE SAID COMPA NY AVAILABLE AT PB PAGES 11 TO 13. THE LEARNED COUNSEL ARGUED THAT ALL THES E DETAILS WITH PROPER EXPLANATION WERE AVAILABLE BEFORE BOTH THE AUTHORIT IES BELOW WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN APPRECIATED BY ANY OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE LEARNED DR SHRI H.K. LAL ON THE OTHER HAND RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF BO TH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PER USED THE FACTS ON RECORD. THERE IS NO DISPUTE TO THE FACT THAT THE A SSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THE EXPLANATION THAT CERTAIN EXPENSES LIKE SALARY AND R ENT ARE REIMBURSED TO SOME EXTENT AND BALANCE AMOUNT IS CHARGED TO PROFIT & LO SS ACCOUNT WHEREAS CERTAIN EXPENSES ARE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE ON BE HALF OF THE PRINCIPAL WHERE THE BILLS ARE ISSUED IN THE NAME OF THE PRINC IPAL ITSELF AND CHARGED DIRECTLY TO THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNT. IT APPEARS THAT THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN CONSIDERED BY ANY OF T HE AUTHORITIES BELOW. IT WILL BE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE IF THE MATTER I S RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE 4 ASSESSING OFFICER WHO WILL EXAMINE THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDE THE ISSUE ACCORDINGLY. THE AO IS DIRECT ED TO ACT ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATIST ICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH JANUARY 2010. SD/- SD/- (I.P. BANSAL) (B.P. JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 29 TH JANUARY 2010. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR BY ORDER *MG DEPUTY REGISTRAR ITAT.