Tribunal affirms CIT(A)'s deletion of Rs.3,64,92,610 addition, citing precedent. Revenue Department appeal dismissed.

The Tribunal upheld the Ld. CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of Rs.3,64,92,610 made by the Assessing Officer, citing consistency with jurisdictional Bench judgments for various assessment years. The Tribunal emphasized the Ld. CIT(A)'s discretion in following precedent and dismissed the Revenue Department's appeal, finding no perversity, impropriety, or illegality in the decision. The judgment was delivered on 21.06.2019.

---

---

Issues:
1. Appeal against deletion of addition made by Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Application of gross profit margin and addition of Rs.3,64,92,610 by the Assessing Officer.
3. Challenge of Assessing Officer's action before the Ld. CIT(A) and subsequent deletion of the addition.
4. Consideration of judgments by jurisdictional Bench of ITAT for various assessment years.
5. Argument regarding consistency in decisions by Ld. CIT(A) for different assessment years.
6. Analysis of the Ld. CIT(A)'s order and justification for following jurisdictional Bench judgments.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the Revenue Department against an order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Jalandhar under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, where the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs.3,64,92,610 made by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order framed under section 143(3) of the Act.
2. The Assessing Officer applied a gross profit margin of 36.63% to the costs of sales to calculate the gross profit earned by the assessee on the goods sold during the year. Additionally, an average profit margin of 16.5% was calculated, resulting in the aforementioned addition.
3. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition after considering and following judgments of the jurisdictional Bench of ITAT in the assessee's own cases for different assessment years, including 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12, and 2012-13. The Ld. CIT-DR argued that the order lacked reasoning and consistency, citing a different decision for the assessment year 2014-15.
4. The Tribunal observed that the Ld. CIT(A) appropriately relied on the judgments of the jurisdictional Bench of ITAT for the relevant assessment years to reach logical conclusions. It was emphasized that the Ld. CIT(A) was not obliged to follow different reasoning or orders contrary to those of the jurisdictional Bench. The order was deemed consistent and not suffering from any perversity, impropriety, or illegality.
5. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the Ld. CIT(A)'s order and dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue Department. The decision was pronounced in open court on 21.06.2019.

---