Case Law Details
ACIT Vs Gajalaxmi Steel Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Pune)
There is no dispute on the fact that the Assessing Officer made addition based on the estimation with reference to the consumption of electricity.
the Assessing Officer had made the addition of Rs 7,65,23,877 on the basis of wrong presumption/ assumptions. I find it quite baffling that the A.O. had levelled the allegation of unrecorded sales against the appellant company on the basis of some mathematical exercise without any corroborative evidence on record. This allegation of the A.O. has remained unsubstantiated and it is nothing more than a sweeping statement. The production of the assessee company is liable to Central Excise Duty and hence, the assessee has also maintained records and register as prescribed under Central Excise Act. Considering the judicial ratios, it is clear that no addition can be made merely on basis of electricity consumption formula.
This view is also supported by the decisions of various Tribunals such as Janta Tiles Vs. ACIT (66 TTJ 695) (Jurisdictional Pune Bench); DCIT Kolapur Vs. J. D. Thote Dairies (Jurisdictional Pune Bench in ITA No 115/PN/2000 decision dated 31/05/2011); Roop Niketan Vs. ACIT (90 TTJ 1097) (Mumbai Bench) and ITO Vs. Gurubachan singh Juneja (55 ITD 75). Respectfully following the above decisions and the facts & circumstances of the present case, I direct the AO to delete the addition of Rs. 7,65,23,877 made by him.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT PUNE
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
