IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH E : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.5879/DEL/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Nagesh Knitwears P. Ltd., vs DCIT, Circle 18(1), 15/50, Old Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN: AAACN2140D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: None Department by: Ms Rinku Singh, Sr.DR Date of Hearing: 29.8.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 20.9.2019 ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JM Challenging order dated 3.10.2016 of learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-33, New Delhi {for short Learned CIT(A) } passed in Appeal No.2734/16-17, assessee preferred this appeal. 2. Brief facts are that assessee is engaged in manufacturing and export of woollen, cotton and blended hosiery knitwear. For Asstt. Yeare 2012-13 they have filed their return of income on 29.9.2012 declaring income of Rs.1,20,90, 150/-. During course of assessment proceedings, ld. AO observed from profit and loss account that assessee company had debited amount of Rs.48,73,791/- on account of 2 rebate and discount. Assessee was required to furnish complete details in respect of said rebate and discount, assessee filed ledger account of Rs.4,78,611/- in respect of rebate and discount only and another ledger was in respect of claim paid to foreign parties at Rs.44,08,788/- and since assessee failed to substantiate claim except filing ledger account which is not enough proof, ld. AO added total sum of Rs.48,73,791/- under head Rebate and discount . 3. Assessee preferred appeal. Ld. CIT(A) during course of his order observed that disallowance of rebate and discount had two components, namely, Rs.44,08,788/- in respect of export sales amounting to Rs.34.53 crores and rebate of Rs.4,65,003/- in respect of domestic sales amounting to Rs.15.26 crores. On perusal of bank certificates of export and realization from which difference between bill amount and realized amount was verified, ld. CIT(A) directed deletion of Rs.44,08,758/-. In respect of Rs.4,65,003/- relating to domestic sale, ld. CIT(A) observed that though assesseee was asked to produce books of accounts, they failed to produce same. So also no vouchers were produced. Ld. CIT(A), therefore, confirmed disallowance to tune of Rs.4,65,003/-. 4. Aggrieved by order of ld. CIT(A) by sustaining addition to tune of Rs.4,65,003/-, assessee preferred appeal. It is argument of ld. AR that sole ground for disallowance by AO and sustaining thereof by ld. CIT(A) is that no vouchers have been produced before authorities in respect of this amount. It is submitted by ld. AR that authorities below should have noted fact that assessee is maintaining regular books of accounts which are 3 audited. He further submitted that in respect of earlier year and subsequent assessment years rebate and discount in respect of domestic sales constituted in same range as all these years and having accepted same, authorities below committed error in disallowing it for this year. He produced copies of assessment orders for AYs 2013-14 to 2015-16. 5. Per contra, it is submission on behalf of ld. DR that sufficient opportunity was given by authorities below to assessee to produce books of accounts and vouchers and other evidences in respect of claim but assessee failed to file it and, therefore, authorities below are justified in disallowing and sustaining same. 6. We have gone through record in light of submissions made on either side . In so far as merits of case are concerned, it is admitted fact out of total disallowance of Rs.48,73,791/-, ld. CIT(A) thought it fit to delete addition to tune of Rs.44,08,788/- in respect of export sales amounting to Rs.30.45 crores after verification of bank certificates of export and realization. However, in respect of balance amount of Rs.4,65,003/- relating to domestic sales on ground of non production of vouchers, it was disallowed. 7. There is no denial of averments made on behalf of assessee that for Asstt. Years 2008-09 to 2011-12, domestic sales were Rs.7.62 crores, Rs.8.09 crores, Rs.9.82 crores and Rs.12.27 crores wherein rebate and discount was Rs.1.03 lacs, Rs.1.58 lacs, Rs.1.99 lacs and Rs.3 lacs constituting 0.14%, 0.20%, 0.20% and 0.24% respectively. For all these years, assessment was made u/s 143(3) of Act and no 4 disallowance was made in respect of these years while passing scrutiny assessment orders. 8. copies of orders for Asstt. Years 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015- 16 are produced and it is submitted that for Asstt. Years 2013-14 sales were Rs.18.07 crores and rebate and discount is about Rs.12.07 lacs constituting 0.67% and same was accepted by ld. AO u/s 143(3) of Act. Further, it is submitted that in respect of Asstt. Years 2014-15, there was disallowance to tune of Rs.3,09,249/- and Rs.3,59,320/- respectively but relief was granted by ld. CIT(A) in appeal. 9. All these things would show that amount of rebate and discount in respect of domestic sales is varying between 0.4% and 0.67%. It is, therefore, clear that rebate and discount for Asstt. Year 2012-13 by 0.30% is fitting in order of things and there is nothing abnormal. Having regard to this factual matrix, we are of considered opinion that there is no justification for disallowance and same is liable to be deleted. We direct deletion of same. 10. In result, appeal of assessee is allowed. Order Pronounced in open court on 20th September, 2019. Sd/- sd/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (K.NARASIMHACHARY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 20th September, 2019 VJ Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 5 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI Draft dictated on 5.9.2019 Draft placed before author 6.9.2019 Draft proposed & placed before second member Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. Approved Draft comes to Sr.PS/PS Kept for pronouncement on Date of uploading order on website File sent to Bench Clerk Date on which file goes to AR Date on which file goes to Head Clerk. Date of dispatch of Order. Nagesh Knitwears P. Ltd. v. DCIT, Circle 18(1), New Delhi