TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 683X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2004 (7) TMI 12 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] therefore, in the absence of any contrary material brought to our notice against the decision of the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court relied upon by the Ld. CIT(A), we do not find any infirmity in his order deleting the addition. Accordingly, ground of appeal number 2 raised by the Revenue is dismissed. Addition of low house hold withdrawals - addition towards house hold expenses is very low keeping in view the rising of price day by day and the minimum expenses required for sustaining the family - CIT-A deleted the addition - HELD THAT:- As stated earlier, the family of the assessee consists of self and his wife and the two children are earning separately and are residing in Pune and Chandigarh respectively. The assessee also owns ancestral agricultural land of about 10 acres and the income from agriculture is also used for meeting the house hold expenses. Apart from the above, the assessee is staying in his own house in a small town. Therefore, in the absence of any evidence before the A.O. to show that the assessee has incurred any extravagant expenditure for maintaining a lavish life style or has performed any marriage fun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... statement Purchases from 01.03.2013 to 31.03.2013 Sales from 01.03.2013 to 31.03.2013 Effective stock as on 31.03.2013 (2+3-4) As per Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2013 Difference 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DAP Khad 72,00,000 58,02,915 73.536 1,29,29,379 31,28,060 98,01,319 MOP ' (Potash) 29,10,000 - 13,000 28,97,000 9,88,160 20,30,679 Urea 13,50,000 92,34,616 8,61,336 97,23,280 10,80,750 86,42,530 SSP(Super Phosphate) 8,00,000 - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; 1,12,010/- only for house hold expenses. The drawings shown by the assessee according to the A.O. is very low keeping in view the rising prices day by day and considering the minimum expenses required for sustaining the family. He, therefore, asked the assessee to explain as to why the household drawings of ₹ 30,000/- per month should not be considered for keeping his life style and status in the society enjoyed. It was explained by the assessee that expenses shown at ₹ 1,12,010/- is sufficient for self, wife and two children. However, the Assessing Officer did not accept the explanation of the assessee. Considering the estimated value of expenditure at ₹ 30,000/- per month, the Assessing Officer made addition of ₹ 2,47,990/- to the total income of the assessee on account of household withdrawals. Thus the Assessing Officer determined the total income at ₹ 2,36,72,550/-. 6. Before the learned CIT(A), the assessee challenged all the three additions. So far as the addition on account of difference of stock value of ₹ 2,19,65,361/-is concerned, it was argued that the assessee was dealing in government controlled items like fertilizers and chemi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... furnished to the bank as on 31.03.2013 tallies with stock as per books of accounts. The AO was to assess the income for the full year. 7. It was further submitted that the various decisions relied by the Assessing Officer are not applicable to the facts of the present case. 7.1. Based on the arguments advanced by the assessee, the learned CIT(A) deleted the addition of ₹ 2,19,65,351/- by observing as under:- I have considered the submissions and facts placed before me along with judgments cited by the appellant as well as relied by the AO. The facts of the case relied by the AO cannot be followed in the case of the appellant as differentiated by the appellant herein above. The case of the appellant is fully covered by the judgment of jurisdictional High Court of P H in the case of CIT v. Sidhu Rice and General Mills, (2006) reported at 281 ITR 428 and judgment of Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs N. Swamy reported at 241 ITR 363. The addition made by the AO is not based on any valid evidence. The AO cannot be assumed to make addition only on the basis of statement furnished to third party i.e. bank as the same is without any sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orts page 335 (ITAT Jodhpur). 9.1. Based on the arguments advanced by the assessee, the learned CIT(A) deleted the addition by observing as under : Keeping in view the size and standard of living of the family and place of residence in a small city as well as the factual position, as explained above, no addition on A/c of alleged low H/H expenses is warranted. In view of above your good self is prayed to please delete the addition of ₹ 247990/- made by the AO. In view of the submissions made by the appellant and considering that the family resides in their own house in a small city, I do not see any justification in making such an addition and I delete the same. This ground of appeal is allowed. 10. Aggrieved with such order of the learned CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds:- 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 2,19,65,361/- on account of difference of stock value as per the bank stock statement and as per the books of accounts as on 31.03.2013 as observation of CIT(A) cannot be relied upon that any statement of facts furnished by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... National Bank vide letter dated 28.11.2016, copy of which is reproduced in the impugned order. In this reply the bank has stated that due to renovation of the branch the file containing stock statement of assessment year under appeal is not traceable at present. However, as per banking practice whenever the party submitted stock statement same is checked/verified by the bank officials. It would, therefore, show that the stock statement submitted by the assessee to the bank was not produced before the AO. The bank has merely explained their general practice for verifying the stock statement. However, what happened in the case of the assessee has not been clarified by the bank. Thus, the authorities below merely relied upon the general practice of the bank instead of verifying the actual fact of the case of the assessee. The assessee submitted that as on the closing of the financial year the closing stock was of ₹ 1,88,17,001/- which is also reported to the bank on the same date which is also certified by the bank (PB-11). It would, therefore, show that the stock statement tally with the stock statement submitted to the bank at the end of the financial year on 31.03.2014. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the bank which is a third party evidence. While doing so, he has relied upon the decision of the jurisdictional High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs., Sidhu Rice and General Mills reported at [2006] 281 ITR 428 and the decision of Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs., N. Swamy reported at 241 ITR 363. The reason given by the Ld. CIT(A) while deleting the addition has already been reproduced in the preceding paragraph. Since the Ld. CIT(A) while deleting the addition has relied upon the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs., Sidhu Rice and General Mills (supra), therefore, in the absence of any contrary material brought to our notice against the decision of the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court relied upon by the Ld. CIT(A), we do not find any infirmity in his order deleting the addition. Accordingly, ground of appeal number 2 raised by the Revenue is dismissed. 13. Ground of appeal number.3 by the Revenue relates to the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition of ₹ 2.47.990/- made by the A.O. on account of low house hold withdrawals. 13. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
