HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Commissioner of Income-tax-VII
v/s.
Chetan Das Lachman Das
IT APPEAL NOS. 1788, 1789, 1791, 2021, 2023, 2024 & 2045 OF 2010
AUGUST 7, 2012
JUDGMENT
R.V. Easwar, J.
In these appeals by the Revenue filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’, for short) the following questions of law were framed by us on 14.05.2012: –
| ITA No. | Assessment Year | Question Framed |
|---|---|---|
| 2021/2010 | 2000-01 | Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) was right in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 40,12,470/- and Rs. 1,05,69,539/- on account of suppressed sale value of Hing and compound Hing, respectively? |
| 2045/2010 | 2001-02 | 1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) was right in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 44,59,659/- and Rs. 1,14,75,914/- on account of suppressed sale value of Hing and compound Hing, respectively?2. Whether Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has failed to decide the issue of depreciation on the alleged foreign car and therefore the order is perverse? |
| 1788/2010 | 2002-03 | 1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) was right in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 68,10,158/- and Rs. 1,02,93,262/- on account of suppressed sale value of Hing and compound Hing, respectively?2. Whether Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has failed to decide the issue of depreciation on the alleged foreign car and therefore the order is perverse? |
| 2023/2010 | 2003-04 | 1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) was right in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 89,81,169/- and Rs. 1,37,45,163/- on account of suppressed sale value of Hing and compound Hing, respectively?2. Whether Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has failed to decide the issue of depreciation on the alleged foreign car and therefore the order is perverse? |
| 1789/2010 | 2004-05 | 1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) was right in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 73,58,074/- and Rs. 1,32,07,596/- on account of suppressed sale value of Hing and compound Hing, respectively?2. Whether Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has failed to decide the issue of depreciation on the alleged foreign car and therefore the order is perverse? |
| 2024/2010 | 2005-06 | 1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) was right in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,22,40,033/- and Rs. 1,36,92,746/- on account of suppressed sale value of Hing and compound Hing, respectively?2. Whether Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has failed to decide the issue of depreciation on the alleged foreign car and therefore the order is perverse? |
| 1791/2010 | 2006-07 | 1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) was right in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,22,40,033/- and Rs. 1,36,92,746/- on account of suppressed sale value of Hing and compound Hing, respectively?2. Whether Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has failed to decide the issue of depreciation on the alleged foreign car and therefore the order is perverse? |
2. The assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of Hing. It also carries on the processing of Hing under which edible Hing is produced from pure/raw Hing by subjecting the same to a process. The partners of the assessee firm are Anil Kumar Bhatia (HUF) and Sanjay Bhatia (HUF). On 13.12.2005 there was search of the assessee’s premises under Section 132 of the Act. In the course of the search certain documents were found which according to the Assessing Officer suggested gross under invoicing of sales and suppression of production/ yield of Hing. As required by Section 153A of the Act, the assessment for the assessment years 2000-01 to 2006-07 were completed by the Assessing Officer in which additions were made on account of suppressed sale value of Hing and compound Hing and suppression on account of input – output ratio of process of Hing. In all the assessment years except the year 2000-01 the Assessing Officer also disallowed depreciation of car on the ground that it was on imported car.
3. A perusal of the assessment orders show that the gross profit rate had shown an abnormal volatility. This can be seen from the following chart set out in the assessment order for the assessment year 2000-01: –
