Ashima Ispat Pvt.Limited,, Ahmedabad vs Department Of Income Tax

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद यायपीठ ''D'', अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD, "D" BENCH

सव ौी ौी जी. जी.सी. सी.गु ा, माननीय उपा!य", उपा!य", एवं एन. एन.एस. एस. सैनी, ी, लेखा सदःय के सम" । BEFORE S/SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT AND N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)

ITA No.471 and 472/Ahd/2011 [Asstt.Year : 2004-2005 and 2005-2006]

ACIT, Ahmedabad Cir.1 बनाम/Vs. M/s.Ashima Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Ahmedabad. 304, Akashrath B/6. Pariseema Ellisbridge, Ahemdabad.

PAN : AABCA 3150 D

(अपीलाथ+ / Appellant) (ू-यथ+ / Respondent)

राजःव क. ओर से/ : Revenue by Shri B.L.Yadav, Sr.DR िनधा 1रती क. ओर से/ : Assessee by Shri P.M. Mehta सुनवाई क. तार4ख/ : Date of Hearing 18th December, 2014

घोषणा क. तार4ख/ : 02-02-2015 Date of Pronouncement

आदे श / O R D E R

PER SHRI G.C.GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT: These two appeals by the Revenue for the Asstt.Years 2004-05 and 2005-06 are directed against the order of the CIT(A), Ahmedabad. These are being disposed with this consolidated order.

2. The identical ground of the Revenue in both these appeals is as under: ITA No.471-472/Ahd/2011

"1. The ld.CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of [Rs.13,70,288 for A.Y.2004-05] and [Rs.12,51,310/- for A.Y.2005-06] made by the AO under section 40A(3) of the Act."

3. The learned DR relied on the order of the AO. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue of disallowance under section 40A(3) of the Act is covered in favour of the assessee with the decision of the Ahmedabad Tribunal in assessee's own case for earlier Asstt.Years 2001-02 to 2003-04 and also for the subsequent Asstt.Years 2006-07 and 2007-08 in ITA Nos.3434 to 3438/Ahd/2010 vide consolidated order for these assessments years dated 14.3.2014. He submitted that the facts of the case for the relevant assessment years are identical with the facts of the case for the preceding as well as subsequent assessment years.

4. We have considered rival submissions and perused the orders of the AO and the CIT(A). We find that the facts of the case of the assessee for the relevant Asstt.Years 2004-05 and 2005-06 are similar to the facts of the case of the assessee for the earlier Asstt.Years 2001-02 to 2003-04 and subsequent Asstt.Years 2006-07 and 2007-08. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Ahmedabad Tribunal vide their order dated 14.3.2014 (supra) has decided the issue of disallowance under section 40A(3) of the Act for the above mentioned preceding and subsequent assessment years in favour of the assessee, and the disallowance has been directed to be deleted. The Tribunal has followed the decision of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Banwari Lal Banshidhar, 229 ITR 229 (All) wherein held that when the gross profit rate was applied, that would take care of everything and there was no need for the AO to make scrutiny of the amount incurred on the purchases made by the assessee. We being in agreement with the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Ahmedabad Tribunal in assessee's own case vide order dated 14.3.2014 (supra), and respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court cite supra, decide the issue in favour of the assessee and disallowance made under section 40A(3) of the Act for both the assessment years before us, -2- ITA No.471-472/Ahd/2011

deleted by the CIT(A), are confirmed and the ground of the appeals of the Revenue for both the assessment years are dismissed.

5. In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed.

Order pronounced in Open Court on the date mentioned hereinabove.

Sd/- Sd/- एन. एन.एस. (एन एस. सैनी /N.S.SAINI) (जी. जी.सी. सी.गु ा/G.C. GUPTA) लेखा सदःय /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER उपा!य" /VICE-PRESIDENT

Copy of the order forwarded to: 1) : Appellant 2) : Respondent 3) : CIT(A) 4) : CIT concerned 5) : DR, ITAT. BY ORDER

DR/AR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD

-3-