Commissioner Of Income Tax,Central Ii v. M/S.susee Cars And Trucks Private Limited

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 29.06.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMYANDTHE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA Tax Case Appeal Nos.633 to 637 of 2014 Commissioner of Income Tax,Central II,108, Nungambakkam High Road,Chennai - 600 034. ...Appellant in all TCAs Vs. M/s.Susee Cars and Trucks Private Limited,117/3, Theni Main Road,Madurai - 625 016.PAN : AAH CS 0676 E ...Respondent in all TCAs COMMON PRAYER: Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Chennai "D" Bench, dated 11.10.2012 passedin ITA Nos.1424, 1425, 1426, 1427 & 1428/MDS/2012 for theassessment years 2003-2008. Appeal against the order dated 01.03.2012 made in ITA Nos.473 to477/2008-2009 on the file of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals-II), Madurai for the Assessment year 2003-2008 andagainst the order dated 23.12.2008 made in PAN Number AAHCS0676Eon the file of the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax CentralCircle-III Madurai for the Assessment year 2003-2004, 2004-2005,2005-2006, 2006-2007, 2007-2008 respectivly. For Appellant : Mr.Kaushikin all TCAs for Mr.S.Sridhar For Respondent : Mrs.V. Pushpain all TCAs Junior Standing counsel for Mr.M.Swaminathan, Senior Standing Counsel COMMON JUDGMENT (The Common Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.HEMALATHA, J.) These appeals are directed against the orders of Income TaxAppellate Tribunal 'D' Bench, Chennai by its order dated11.10.2012 in ITA Nos.1424, 1425, 1426, 1427 & 1428/MDS/2012 forthe assessment years 2003-2008. 2.The Respondent/Assessee M/s.Susee Cars and Trucks PrivateLimited is engaged in the business of sale and service of Eicher& Hyundai vehicles and trading of Petroleum products. A searchaction under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was carriedout on 04.07.2006 in the residential premises ofShri.S.Rajasekaran who is the Managing Director of theRespondent Company. Survey under Section 133A were alsosimultaneously conducted in the business premises of theassessee company. Notices under Section 153C read with Section153 A of the Act were issued to assessee company for theassessment years 2003-2004 to 2007-2008. In response to noticesthe assessee filed the Returns in Form No.1 (Not in Form No.2)for the above assessment years. After affording opportunity ofhearing the assessing officer completed the assessments makingaddition on account of registration of new vehicles and RTOexpenses of Rs.2,000/- per vehicle. Thereby the assessingofficer determined the taxable income and demanded tax which isinclusive of interests under Section 234 A to C of the Act areas follows: Aggrieved by the orders of assessment, the assessee filedappeals before the CIT(A)-II, Madurai. The CIT(A) held that theevidence found in one case may not be taken as evidence foundfor all, as there is close family link / relation between onesub group and other sub group of M/s.Susee group. Any additionshould be supported by either proper seized/impounded materialsor by way of corroborating circumstantial evidence and thereforedeleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved bythe order of CIT(A) the department filed appeals before theAppellate Tribunal 'D' Bench, Chennai. 3.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal however held thatsimilar issue regarding additon made on estimated receipts fromthe customers for getting vehicle registered, had already comeup for consideration before the Tribunal in respect ofassessee's sister concern namely M/s.Susee Auto Plaza PrivateLimited wherein the addition made on this account was deleted.Now aggrieved over the orders passed by the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, the present appeals are filed by the revenue on thefollowing substantial questions of law: 3.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal however held thatsimilar issue regarding additon made on estimated receipts fromthe customers for getting vehicle registered, had already comeup for consideration before the Tribunal in respect ofassessee's sister concern namely M/s.Susee Auto Plaza PrivateLimited wherein the addition made on this account was deleted.Now aggrieved over the orders passed by the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, the present appeals are filed by the revenue on thefollowing substantial questions of law: "1)Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the AppellateTribunal was right in deleting the additon onregistration expenses when the assessee hadincurred only Rs.400/- plus road tax towardsregistration fees, whereas it collectedRs.2,000/- per vehicle from its customers andthe amount debited in registration account isalso more?2)Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the AppellateTribunal was right in deleting the addition byholding that no incriminating documents werefound and hence no basis to assess the amountcollected for the purpose of registration ofnew vehicles?3)Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the AppellateTribunal was right in deleting the additionsince the assessee is in the same line ofbusinsess, further all the group concerns areoperated fromt he same address, modus operandiis the same, the partners/directors arerelated and common and the employees are alsocommon?" 4.Heard Mr.Kaushik for Mr.S.Sridhar, learned Counsel forthe appellant and Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior StandingCounsel assisted by Ms.V.Puspha, learned Junior Standing Counselfor the respondent. 5.A perusal of the concurrent findings of CIT(A) and ITATreveals the following: a) In assessee's case survey was conducted. b) No incriminating document was found in this assessee's casefor the relevant assessment years.for the relevant assessment years. c) No evidence was collected from any customer which can be adirect and best evidence in this regard.direct and best evidence in this regard. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ d) Books of accounts of assessee have not been either rejectedor found defective.e) No evidence was fould releable with assessee's casedirectly from the assessee or on the basis of which anyestimation under Section 153C can be done. 6.In this back drop, both CIT(A) and ITAT deleted theadditions made by the Assessing Officer for the assessment years2003-2004, 2004-2005, 2005-2006, 2006-2007 and 2007-2008.Since the findings are based on facts, no substantial questionsof law is involved in the present case. Accordingly, the appealsare dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mtl To1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, D Bench, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals-II, Madurai. Madurai. 3. The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-III, Madurai. +1cc to Mr.M.Swaminathan, Advocate, S.R.No.29907 Tax Case Appeal Nos.633 to 637 of 2014 RSV(CO)RGA(30/07/2021)