M/s Viscus oils Pvt. Ltd, Indore v. The ACIT, Indore

ITA 282/IND/2009 | 2002-2003
Pronouncement Date: 24-05-2010 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 28222714 RSA 2009
Assessee PAN AAACV6554D
Bench Indore
Appeal Number ITA 282/IND/2009
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 2 day(s)
Appellant M/s Viscus oils Pvt. Ltd, Indore
Respondent The ACIT, Indore
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 24-05-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 24-05-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 10-05-2010
Next Hearing Date 10-05-2010
Assessment Year 2002-2003
Appeal Filed On 22-05-2009
Judgment Text
PAGE 1 OF 4 -. I.T.A.NO. 282/IND/2009 VISCUS OILS PRIVATE LIMITED INDORE. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH : INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI V.K. GUPTA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PAN NO. : AAACV6554D I.T.A.NO. 282/IND/2009 A.Y. : 2002-03 M/S.VISCUS OILS PRIVATE LIMITED ACIT 55/1/2-C NEW PALASIA INDORE. VS 3(1) INDORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI ANIL K.KHANDELWAL C. A. RESPONDENT BY : SMT.APARNA KARAN SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 10.05.2010 O R D E R PER V.K. GUPTA A.M. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARISES OUT OF ORD ER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-I INDORE DATED 27.02.2009 FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2002-03. 2. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND HAVE ALSO PERUSE D THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3. THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND RAISED IN THIS APPEAL REA DS AS UNDER :- PAGE 2 OF 4 -. I.T.A.NO. 282/IND/2009 VISCUS OILS PRIVATE LIMITED INDORE. ON THE FACT AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE PENALTY OF RS. 65 00 0/- IMPOSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 271(1)(C) OF T HE ACT. 4. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS VALU ING STOCK NET OF EXCISE DUTY. HENCE THE AO BY INVOKING THE PROVISIO NS OF SECTION 145A ADDED A SUM OF RS. 1 75 860/- TO THE VALUE OF CLOSI NG STOCK WHICH WAS ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSEE ALSO. THE AO ALSO MADE DIS ALLOWANCE OF RS. 35 000/- OUT OF SALES PROMOTION EXPENSES FOR WANT O F SPECIFIC DETAILS OF GIFTS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREAFTER THE AO LEV IED PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) AT RS. 65 000/- RELYING ON THE OBSERVATI ONS OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS IN RESPECT OF QUANTUM APP EAL. AGGRIEVED BY THIS THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE L D. CIT(A) WHO ALSO CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO BY HOLDING THAT MENS REA WAS NOT REQUIRED TO ATTRACT THE PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. AG GRIEVED BY THIS THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THA T THE ASSESSEE WAS MAINTAINING REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT TAX AUDIT REPORT HAD ALSO BEEN FILED ALONGWITH RETURN OF INCOME HENCE INSPITE OF ADDITION SO MADE IT COULD NOT BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSEE CONCEA LED THE INCOME OR FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF ITS INCOME. IT WAS ALSO CONTENDED THAT THERE WAS NO IMPACT ON THE PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE A S A WHOLE BECAUSE THE PAGE 3 OF 4 -. I.T.A.NO. 282/IND/2009 VISCUS OILS PRIVATE LIMITED INDORE. CLOSING STOCK IN THIS YEAR HAD TO BE ALLOWED AS A D EDUCTION BY WAY OF OPENING STOCK OF NEXT YEAR. AS REGARD TO OTHER DISA LLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THE LEARNED COUNSEL CONTENDED T HAT IT WAS A CASE OF CHANGE OF OPINION AND NO SPECIFIC DEFECTS HAD BEEN POINTED OUT. HENCE NO PENALTY COULD BE LEVIED THEREON. 6. THE LD. SR. DR ON THE OTHER HAND PREFERRED TO RE LY ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY BOTH THE SIDES MATERIAL ON RECORD AND THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIE S BELOW. 8. IT IS NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS MAINTAINING BOOKS OF ACCOUNT REGULARLY. ITS ACCOUNTS ARE ALSO AUDITED. THE ASSES SEE IS VALUING HIS CLOSING STOCK NET OF EXCISE DUTY OVER THE YEARS AN D THIS FACT IS DULY DISCLOSED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS WELL AS IN THE TAX AUDIT REPORT ENCLOSED WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME. THE APPLICATION OF SECTION 145A CANNOT BE DISPUTED HENCE REQUIRED MODIFICATION IN VALUE OF STOCK HAS RIGHTLY BEEN CARRIED OUT. HOWEVER WHEN THE FACTS O F METHOD OF VALUATION ARE DULY DISCLOSED HENCE IT CANNOT BE A CASE OF F URNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFOR E THE PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT CANNOT BE LEVIED. WE ARE FURTH ER OF THE VIEW THAT IT IS ALSO NOT A CASE OF CONCEALMENT OF INCOME AS WELL IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS. AS REGARD TO OTHER DISALLOWANCE WE FIND THA T IT IS A CASE OF REJECTION PAGE 4 OF 4 -. I.T.A.NO. 282/IND/2009 VISCUS OILS PRIVATE LIMITED INDORE. OF THE ASSESSEES CLAIM AND IN THE PENALTY PROCEEDI NGS IT HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED THAT IT WAS IN FACT THE REAL INCOME O F THE ASSESSEE HENCE FOR THIS REASON THE PENALTY ON THIS ADDITION ALSO CANN OT BE LEVIED. WE FURTHER FIND THAT THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. RELIANCE PETRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED AS REPORTED IN 322 ITR 158 DULY SUPPORTS THE VIEW TAKEN BY US. ACCORDINGLY WE CAN CEL THE PENALTY. 9. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STA NDS ALLOWED. THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24 TH MAY 2010. SD/- SD/- (JOGINDER SINGH) (V. K. GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 24 TH MAY 2010. CPU*