TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (5) TMI 707
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....venue is now in appeal before us and has raised the following grounds;- 1. The Ld. Commissioner of Income tax (A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of freight inward, freight outward and octroi expenses of Rs. 48,63,066/-. 2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income tax [A] has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition made on account of suppressed conversation charges of Rs. 1,33,21,509/-. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income tax (A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. It is, therefore , prayed that the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income tax (A) may be set-aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored. Ground no. 1 is with respect to deleting the disallowance of freight and octroi expenses. 4. On perusing the Profit and Loss account, A.O noticed that Assessee had debited freight and coolie and cartage expenses to the Profit and Loss account. He also noticed that Assessee was working only for AIA Engineering Ltd its holding company and was doing the job work for it. On perusing the agreement dated 02.05.2000 entered by the Assessee with the holding company, he noticed that one ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s in the current year are same as in the assessment year 2003-04, the disallowance made by the A.O. is deleted respectfully following the decision of honorable ITAT for assessment year 2003-04. This ground of appeal is therefore, allowed. 2.2.1 Since the issue for the assessment year under consideration is similar to that of earlier years, assessing officer is directed to delete the disallowance made by him of Rs. 48,63,066/-. This ground of appeal is allowed. 5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of ld. CIT(A), Revenue is now in appeal before us. 6. Before us, ld. D.R. supported the order of A.O. On the other hand, ld. A.R. submitted that on identical facts for A.Y. 2006-07 Revenue had preferred appeal before Hon'ble Tribunal and the appeal was dismissed by order dated 12.10.2012 in ITA No. 1851/AHD/2009. He also placed on record the copy of the aforesaid order. He therefore submitted that since the facts of the case in the year under appeal are identical to that of earlier years, the order of CIT(A) be upheld. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We find that ld. CIT(A) while granting the relief had noted that the facts of the case in the y....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Revenue is rejected." 7.1 Once on identical facts a view has already been taken in favour of the assessee in respect of fright and octroi, therefore on the same lines for the year under consideration we hereby affirm the finding on facts of Learned CIT(Appeals). Revenue's ground is dismissed." 9.1. In the appeal before us, the issue is with respect of disallowance of freight and octroi charges. Since, the facts of the case in the present appeal are similar to that of assessment year 2002-03 and 2004-05, which has been accepted by the learned AR and the learned DR and since on identical facts the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal has already decided the issue in earlier years in favour of the assessee, we, following the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench cited supra dismiss this ground of appeal of the revenue. 9. Before us, ld. D.R. could not point any distinguishing feature of the case with that of A.Y. 2006-07. We therefore respectfully following the order of co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal for A.Y. 06-07 find no reason to interfere with the order of ld. CIT(A) and thus this ground of Revenue is dismissed. Ground no. 2 is with respect to deletion made on account of suppressed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or earlier assessment years. The CIT(A)-XVI, Ahmedabad, vide his order in appeal No. CIT(A)- XVI/DCIT.Cir.5/898/09-10 dated 01- 09-2010 for A.Y. 2007-08 held as under :- "4.3. I have considered the submission made by the appellant and observation of the A.O. From the assessment order as well as the appellate order of the CIT(A) for A.Y.2006-07 and A.Y. 2003- 04, it is seen that on this issue the addition has been deleted. Since the facts in the current year are same as in the last year, the addition made by the AO is deleted, following the decision of CIT(A) in the earlier year on this issue. This ground of appeal is therefore allowed. Since the issue for the assessment year under consideration is similar to that of earlier years assessing officer is directed to delete the addition made by him of Rs. 1,33,21,509/-. This ground of appeal is allowed. 11. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of ld. CIT(A), Revenue is now in appeal before us. 12. Before us, ld. D.R. supported the order of A.O. On the other hand ld. A.R. submitted that similar issue came up before the Tribunal in earlier years for A.Y. 2006-07, the Hon'ble Tribunal by following its earlier orders restored the matter to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., hence, accordingly the addition was made. 12. When the matter had gone before the first appellate authority, the Learned CIT(Appeals) has reversed the finding of the Assessing Officer and allowed the claim. Now before us, it was stated that for Assessment Year 2003-04, IT AT Ahmedabad Bench vide order dated 31/12/2009, vide Para -13, the matter was restored back for a fresh adjudication; reproduced below: "13. We have heard the learned DR and the learned AR. In our considered view, the issue cannot be decided without complete data. The parties have not furnished the industry-wise loss or the history of the loss in the case of the assessee for last 4/5 years, the loss incurred during various process undertaken by the assessee, percentage of loss in each process under taken by the assessee, comparison of such loss in difference processes industry-wise and various assessment year-wise in case of the assessee, other comparative instances, the reasons for incurring loss and other factors such as type of machinery used, claim of manufacturer of machines as to the amount of loss likely to occur when work is done on their machines. Accordingly, we restore this issue to the file of the ....