Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak vs Dabur Bricks Co.

Hemant Gupta, J.—This order shall dispose of the above mentioned Income Tax Appeals filed u/s 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for

short the ''Act'') arising out the order dated 10.6.2005 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, Delhi in Income Tax Appeal

No. 2680/DEL/2003, Income Tax Appeal No. 3728/DEL/2003 and ITA No. 2679/DEL/2003 respectively pertaining to assessment year 1999-

2000. The revenue has claimed the following substantial questions of law: -

(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of Hon''ble ITAT is perverse as it is based upon incorrect assumption of

fact.

(ii) Whether the finding of the Tribunal that books of accounts of the assessee did not suffer from any infirmity is based on any cogent evidence.

A survey u/s 133A of the Act was conducted on the business premises of the assessee on 11.8.1998 when certain loose papers were found.

On the basis of loose papers, the Assessing Officer estimated 70 lacs bricks were manufactured during the year. The return was processed and

additions made on the basis of consumption of fire wood by applying net profit rate of 12%. The assessee produced the books of accounts but

such books of accounts were rejected as unreliable. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) applied gross profit rate of 14.8%, the rate

claimed by the assessee in their returns. After making adjustment, the assessment was confirmed accordingly. The Commissioner of Income Tax

(Appeals) (for short the ''CIT(A)'') relied upon the orders passed in the case of CIT v. Dabur Bricks Co. (Assessment Year 1995-96 subject

matter of IT Appeal No. 107 of 2005 decided on 8.12.2011 vide separate order) and accepted the assessee''s appeal.

The said order passed by the Tribunal has been found to be suffering from perversity and has been set aside by a separate order passed in ITA

No. 107 of 2005 dated 8.12.2011.

Keeping in view the reasons recorded therein, the entire basis of the order passed by CIT(A) & Tribunal are also not sustainable.

Consequently, the questions of law as framed are answered in favour of the revenue against the assessee. The matter is remitted back to the

Tribunal to decide the appeal afresh on merits according to law.

Disposed of.