Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad
Peterplast Synthetics Pvt.Ltd.,, ... vs Department Of Income Tax on 16 June, 2010
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
AHMEDABAD BENCH " B "
Before Shri MUKUL SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER and
Shri N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Date of hearing : 16/06/2010 Drafted on: 16/06/2010
ITA No.680/AHD/2008
Assessment Year : 2004-05
The ITO Vs. M/s.Peterplast Synthetics
Ward-4(2) Pvt.Ltd.
Bardoa Plot No.4-5, Tagore Nagar
Nr. Dr.Banker's Hospital
Baroda
PAN/GIR No. : AABCP 1858 P
(APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT)
Appellant by : Shri K.Madhusudan, Sr.D.R.
Respondent by: Shri J.P.Shah
ORDER
PER SHRI MUKUL SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER :
This is an appeal at the behest of the Revenue which has emanated from the order of Learned CIT(Appeals)-III, Baroda dated 24/01/2007 and the solitary substantial ground reads as under:-
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the claim of the assessee that the closing stock was nil though this was not substantiated because books of account were not produced either during the assessment proceedings or during the appellate proceedings and, by overlooking the fact that the assessee's claim that closing stock was sold at loss was also not substantiated.
2. Facts in brief as emerged from the corresponding assessment order passed u/s.143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 dated 27/12/2006 were that the assessee-company was stated to be engaged in the business of ITA No.680/Ahd/2008 ITO vs. M/s.Peterplast Synthetics Pvt.Ltd.
Asst.Year - 2004-05 -2- manufacturing of HDPE Bags/Fabrics. The allegation of the Assessing Officer was that there ought to be closing stock remained which was not disclosed in the accounts of the assessee. To arrive at the said conclusion, the Assessing Officer had made the following calculation:-
Opening stock of finished Rs.13,54,400/-
goods
Add: Purchases Rs. 9,44,277/-
Rs.22,98,277/-
Less: Sales Rs.14,54,293/-
Closing stock remains Rs. 8,43,984/-
2.1. On the basis of above working, the Assessing Officer has held that the closing stock of Rs.8,43,984/- was not shown in the books of account.
The explanation of the assessee of disclosing NIL stock was that during the year, the assessee has closed down its manufacturing plant and sold the fixed assets and factory building. Because of that reason, the assessee has sold all the finished goods, raw-material, etc. at a very low price comparing to the prevailing market rates. However, as per Assessing Officer, the assessee was not able to substantiate the above claim and failed to produce the necessary accounts, hence, the entire amount was added on account of the said closing stock not disclosed by the assessee. The addition was challenged. The Learned CIT(Appeals) has examined the facts of the case and thereafter granted relief vide paragraph No.3.2 as follows:-
"3.2. I have considered the submissions of the ld. A.R and the facts of the case. On perusal of the balance sheet of the ITA No.680/Ahd/2008 ITO vs. M/s.Peterplast Synthetics Pvt.Ltd.
Asst.Year - 2004-05 -3- immediately preceding year it is seen that the assessee had shown closing stock of finished goods which has been disclosed as opening stock of the current year. The schedule of fixed assets, i.e. schedule-5 to the balance sheet as on 31-3-2003 shows that during that year the assessee disposed of its fixed assets like stitching machines, plant and machinery, generator set, computer, printer, air conditioners, weighing machine, fax machine, electric transformer, etc. This clearly shows that the company had gone out of business. In such a situation it is not unusual for the entrepreneur to sell off its stock at below historical cost. From the sales register produced before me it is seen that the entire stock has been disposed off in four transactions. There has been no continuous trading or sale of goods which could indicate that the concern was carrying on business in the normal course. On the other hand, no evidence has been brought on record to bring out the fact that the sales were made outside the books. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances as stated above, I am of the opinion that the addition of Rs.8,43,984/- was not justified and is directed to be deleted. "
3. We have heard both the sides and perused the orders of the authorities below in the light of the compilation filed. Once the admitted factual position is that the assessee was in the process of closing of its business and disposing of the assets, machinery, etc. therefore, it was very natural to sell the finished or unfinished or raw-material at the available price. The Learned CIT(Appeals) has examined the same and he has noticed that as per the Sales Register produced, it was found that ITA No.680/Ahd/2008 ITO vs. M/s.Peterplast Synthetics Pvt.Ltd.
Asst.Year - 2004-05 -4- the entire stock was disposed of in four transactions. It has also been recorded that there were no further trading activity carried out by the assessee. Once the Learned CIT(Appeals) has given a finding on facts which has not been otherwise controverted from the side of the Revenue by placing any cogent material, therefore, we find no force in this ground of the Revenue. The view taken by the Learned CIT(Appeals) is hereby affirmed. Revenue's ground is dismissed.
4. In the result, Revenue's appeal is dismissed.
Order signed, dated and pronounced in the Court on 18/ 06 /2010.
Sd/- Sd/-
( N.S. SAINI ) ( MUKUL SHRAWAT )
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Ahmedabad; Dated 18/ 06 /2010
T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS
Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent
3. The CIT Concerned
4. The ld. CIT(Appeals)-III, Baroda
5. The DR, Ahmedabad Bench
6. The Guard File.
BY ORDER,
स×याǒपत ूित //True Copy//
(Dy./Asstt.Registrar), ITAT, Ahmedabad