IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER &

SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 150 & 151/Agr./2019 (Assessment Year 2013-14)

DCIT, Circle-2(2)(1) Civil Lines, Dabrai, NH-2 Firozabad – 283205		Vs. M/s Uma Glass Works 22, Industrial Estate, Firozabad UP 283203
(cid:1)थायीले खासं ./जीआइआरसं ./PAN/GIR No: AACFU5061D
Appellant .. Respondent

C.O. No.65/Agr./2019 (Assessment Year 2013-14)

M/s Uma Glass Works 22, Industrial Estate, Firozabad UP 283203		Vs. The DCIT, Circle 2(2)(1) Civil Lines, Dabrai, NH-2 Firozabad – 283205
(cid:1)थायीले खासं ./जीआइआरसं ./PAN/GIR No: AACFU5061D
Appellant .. Respondent

Appellant by : Sh. Sahib P Satsangi, CA Respondent by : Sh. Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT, DR Date of Hearing 12.02.2025 Date of Pronouncement 12.02.2025

O R D E R

PER BENCH:

These two Revenue’s appeals and assessee’s Cross Objection involve the same assessee herein, namely M/s Uma Glass Works. All other relevant details thereof are as under:

Sr. No.	Appeal No.	A.Y.	Assessee	Respondent	Order appealed against	Proceedings u/s
1.	150/Agr/2019	2013-14 M/s Uma	Glass Works	DCIT	CIT(A)-2, Agra’s case No. 442/(e-filed) / CIT(A)-2 / Agra / DCIT-2(2)(1) / Firozabad/2017-18 Dated 28.02.2019	154
	2-3 151/Agr/2019 & CO 5/Agr/2019	2013-14 M/s Uma	Glass Works.	DCIT	CIT(A)-2, Agra’s case No. 342/(e-filed) / CIT(A)-2 / Agra / DCIT-2(2)(1) / Firozabad/2017-18 Dated 28.02.2019	154

2. Both the learned representative invite our attention to the Revenue’s main appeal herein ITA No. 151/Agr./2019 raising the following substantive/revised grounds:

“1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Agra has erred in law and on facts in deleting the additions made by the AO without appreciating the facts of the case.

2. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Agra has erred in law and on facts in holding that the Assessee's explanation in relation to the discrepancies identified in the assessment order was justified merely on the basis of the remand report by the Assessing Officer, without any verification or inquiry by the CIT(Appeals).

3. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Agra has erred in law and on facts in ignoring the fact that the Assessee had failed to disclose the figures shown in the Audited Balance Sheet filed before the Department in the Income Tax Return filed by the Assessee, as the figure for Power & Fuel in Part-A - P&L, Para 10 of the Income Tax Return in ITR-S for A.Y. 2013-14 was disclosed at Rs. 16,59,940/- whereas the figure for Purchase of Fuels was shown at Rs.5,00,28,472.50 and that for Consumption of Fuels was shown at Rs.4,99,90,988.50 in the Schedule 17 "Consumption Chart of Principal Items of Raw Material & Chemicals" of the Balance Sheet for A.Y. 2013-14 and available on assessment record.

4. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Agra has erred in law and on facts in ignoring the fact that the Assessee had failed to disclose the figures shown in the Audited Balance Sheet filed before the Department in the Income Tax Return filed by the Assessee, as the figure for Purchases in Part-A - P&L, Para 6 of the Income Tax Return in IT-S for A. Y. 2013-14 was disclosed at Rs. 12,72,65,556/-, and the figure for Consumption of Store & Spare Parts in Part- A - P&L, Para 9 of the Income Tax Return in ITR-S for A.Y. 2013-14 was disclosed at NIL ;Whereas the figure for Purchase of Raw Materials & Chemicals was shown at Rs. 11,69,65,243.11, Purchase of Packing Material was shown at Rs.20,88,286/-, Purchase of Oil & Lubricants was shown at Rs.13,29,550.96 and Purchase of Consumable Store was shown at Rs.6,58,826.83 in the Schedule 17 "Consumption Chart of Principal Items of Raw Material & Chemicals" of the Balance Sheet for A. Y. 2013-14 and available on assessment record.

5. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Agra has erred in law and on facts in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document