TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (11) TMI 465
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n confirming the findings of the Ld. AO with respect to suppression of commission income of Rs. 16,06,379/- and thereby made net addition of Rs. 11,34,710/- after granting deduction for license fees paid and shortages. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual engaged in the business as dealer in petroleum products such as Motor Spirits (MS), High Speed Diesel (HSD) and Lubricants under the name and style M/s. Ramson Filling Station, Wadapally and M/s. Sundaraiah Filling Station, Nakerkal respectively marketed by M/s. Indian Oil Corporation and Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited. The assessee filed her return of income on 21/09/2014 admitting total income of Rs. 6,00,580/-. Subsequently, the case was taken u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the information from the Website of Petroleum Planning and Analysis Cell, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas cannot be applied to the income tax proceedings. (ii) The norms fixed by Petroleum Planning and Analysis Cell are only guidelines during ideal condition. (iii) The actual evaporation shortages and pilferage may be higher due to old delivery equipments installed in the petrol bunks owned by the assessee. (iv) The Assessing Officer had failed to consider the actual shortage and the discount allowed by the assessee to her regular customers which was incorporated in the books of account of of the assessee. (v) The Assessing Officer was wrong in initiating the penalty proceedings U/s. 271(1)(c) of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h the above findings the Ld. CIT (A) confirmed the order of the Ld. AO and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 6. At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted before us that in the assessment order at para 2(A), the Ld. AO had taken into consideration of the data relating to "M/s. Daida Ronikasundaraiah Filling Station", Nakrekal, which is a retail outlet of BPCL and the dealership is granted to M/s. Devarakonda Lavanya and not to the appellant. The Ld. AR further submitted that assessee has enclosed the documents relating to Mrs. Devarakonda Lavanya in the paper book filed before the Tribunal on 13/5/2019 marked as item no 3, 4, 8 & 9. It was further submitted that the assessee had inadvertently omitted to mention in the appeal before the Trib....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as to why this discrepancy was not pointed out before the Ld. AO or even before the Ld. CIT (A) by the assessee or by her Ld.AR. It is quite possible that there may have been a hotch potch in adopting the correct data by the Ld.AO when information is obtained with respect to various dealers from different source. However, though the assessee had shown negligence during the course of the respective proceedings before the Ld. Revenue Authorities and even when I find the elaborate exercise undertaken by the Ld. AO to be quite appealing, I am of the considered view that it is not appropriate to adopt the data belonging to some other assessee while computing the addition in the hands of the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice, I here....