IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 08.12.2011 ITA No. 510 of 2007 Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak …..Appellant vs. M/s Dabur Bricks Company …..Respondent CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA Present: - Mr. Inderpreet Singh, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Sandeep Chabra, Advocate for respondent. HEMANT GUPTA, J This order shall dispose of the above mentioned Income Tax Appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the ‘Act’) arising out the order dated 23.3.2007 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, Delhi in Income Tax Appeal No. 3417/DEL/2006, pertaining to the assessment year 1996-97 The revenue has claimed the following substantial questions of law: - i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of Hon’ble ITAT has erred in law on relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana Court in which no ITA Nos. 510 of 2007 reference about the consumption of 20 M.T. of coal for production of one lac bricks? “ A survey under Section 133A of the Act was conducted on the business premises of the assessee on 11.8.1998 when certain loose papers were found. On the basis of loose papers, the Assessing Officer estimated that bricks worth Rs. 57,91,500/- were manufactured during the year. The assessee produced the books of accounts but such books of accounts were rejected as unreliable. The return was processed and additions made on the basis of consumption of fire wood by applying net profit rate of 6.57%. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (for short the ‘CIT(A)’) dismissed the appeal of the Revenue and relied upon a judgment of this Court passed in CIT vs. Kumar Maaini 262 ITR 380, wherein the revenue’s appeal raising substantial questions of law was dismissed. Learned CIT(A) applied gross profit rate of 14%, the rate claimed by the assessee in its returns. After making adjustment, the assessment was confirmed accordingly. The Tribunal affirmed the said order. The order relied upon and passed by the Tribunal has been found to be suffering from perversity and has been set aside by a separate order passed in ITA No. 107 of 2005 dated 8.12.2011. 2 ITA Nos. 510 of 2007 Keeping in view the reasons recorded therein, the entire basis of the order passed by CIT(A) & Tribunal are also not sustainable. Consequently, the question of law as framed is answered in favour of the revenue against the assessee. The matter is remitted back to the Tribunal to decide the appeal afresh on merits according to law. Disposed of. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE (G.S.SANDHAWALIA) JUDGE 8.12.2011 preeti 3