TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1742X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction @ 4% and deleting the addition of working capital is dismissed. Whether any further expenses on account of manufacturing and administration are to be allowed against unaccounted production worked out? - There is no merit in the ground of appeal raised by the Revenue in this regard as no addition on estimate basis is upheld in the hands of assessee. The ground of appeal No.2 raised by the Revenue is thus, rejected. - Ms. Sushma Chowla, JM And Shri Anil Chaturvedi, AM For the Assessee : Shri Pramod Shingte. For the Revenue : S/Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT Suhas Kulkarni. ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM: Out of this bunch of appeals, cross appeals filed by the assessee and the Revenue are against order of CIT(A), Aurangabad, dated 25.08.2014 relating to assessment year 2010-11 against the order passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ). Further, assessee M/s. Gajlaxmi Steel (Jalna) Pvt. Ltd. is in appeal against the order of CIT(A), Aurangabad, dated 25.08.2014 relating to assessment year 2010-11 against order passed under section 143(3) of the Act. 2. This bunch of appeals relating to different assessee on simila ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted. 5. The assessee is aggrieved by the order of CIT(A) in confirming the determination of quantum of suppressed production / sale of TMT bars merely on the basis of consumption of electricity and also in confirming the addition on account of profit on sale of suppressed production to the tune of Rs.1,31,03,660/-. The assessee is also aggrieved in estimating gross profit @ 4% on suppressed sale as income of the assessee. 6. The Revenue is aggrieved by the order of CIT(A) in quantifying the profit on suppressed production @ 4%. Further, the Revenue is aggrieved by the order of CIT(A) in not appreciating that the working capital was required for purchase of raw material and day-to-day activity for production of goods. 7. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee pointed out that the issue arising in this cross appeals is squarely covered by various orders of Tribunal. It was further pointed out by the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee that there is no allegation of clandestine removal of goods without payment of Excise duty against the assessee by the Excise Department and no physical verification had been carried out either by the Excise or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2015 had considered the issue at length vide paras 54 to 87 and vide paras 88 and 89, the Tribunal had deleted the addition on both counts i.e. addition made on account of suppressed production and alleged investment in purchases, which read as under:- 88. In the entirety of the above said facts and circumstances, we hold that no extrapolation of sales for 300 days can be made in the hands of the assessee on the basis of the evidence found for clandestine removal of material without payment of Excise duty for few days, which in turn, has been admitted by the assessee by way of filing petition before the Settlement Commission, which in turn, has also been accepted by the Settlement Commission. Merely because the Settlement Commission accepted the claim of the assessee of additional Excise duty payable on the said clandestine removal of material without payment of Excise duty does not establish the case of the Revenue that the said figures of additional production should be utilized for extrapolating the sales in the hands of the assessee for the entire year. Admittedly, the assessee had offered additional income on the said clandestine removal of material without payment of Exc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xtent that the additional income to be added in the hands of the assessee is equivalent to profits on suppressed production @ 4% or actual GP rate declared by the assessee whichever was higher. In view thereof, we pass this corrigendum order and the para 88 i.e. from line 17 to 22 would now be substituted by following para. 88. Admittedly, the assessee had offered additional income on the said clandestine removal of material without payment of Excise duty, which is to be added as income in the hands of the assessee. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee fairly admitted that in case the said additional income has not been added while computing the income in the hands of the assessee for the respective years, the same may be directed to be added in the hands of the respective assessee in respective years. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer to verify from the records for the respective years and include the additional income on account of such admitted clandestine removal of material without payment of Excise duty, by the assessee either before the Settlement Commission or before the Excise authorities, in the hands of the assessee. Accordingly, w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ground of appeal raised by the Revenue against the order of CIT(A) in quantifying the suppressed production @ 4% and deleting the addition of working capital is dismissed. 15. The Revenue has also raised an issue as to whether any further expenses on account of manufacturing and administration are to be allowed against unaccounted production worked out in the case of assessee. There is no merit in the ground of appeal raised by the Revenue in this regard as no addition on estimate basis is upheld in the hands of assessee. The ground of appeal No.2 raised by the Revenue is thus, rejected. In view thereof, the appeal of assessee is allowed and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed. ITA No.2024/PN/2014 relating to assessment year 2010-11 16. In the case of M/s. Gajlaxmi Steel (Jalna) Pvt. Ltd., none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application was moved for adjournment. We proceed to decide the appeal ex parte the assessee and after hearing the learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue as the issue involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the orders of Tribunal. 17. The issues raised in the appeal filed by the Revenue are similar to the is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
