Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (1) TMI 744 - AT - Income TaxAssessment u/s 153A - Unaccounted manufacturing of goods - unaccounted turnover between assessee and Balaji Marketing - purchases from open market - Held that:- Assessee was subjected to excise duty on the goods manufactured by it. CIT(A) has also held that excise duty was being imposed on the assessee on the basis of deemed production based upon number of machines installed and their capacity. The assessee being engaged in excisable goods was not found to have manufactured goods in excess of capacities of machines. No documentary evidence was available in the seized material which established any unaccounted turnover between assessee and Balaji Marketing. Further during course of search, no document related to unaccounted manufacturing of goods was found. We find that proprietor of Balaji Marketing had accepted its unaccounted turnover and he had also stated that he had purchased the goods from open market to meet out the increased demand. In view of the above facts and circumstances, we do not find any infirmity in the order of learned CIT(A). Admission of additional evidence - Held that:- We find that the so called additional evidence is a copy of letter exchanged by ACIT, Circle-1 to Jt. CIT, Central Circle, a copy of which is placed at pages 72 to 76 of the paper book and the contents of which have also been reproduced by learned CIT(A) in his order from para 4(10)(i) of his order. The assessee had filed this letter during appellate proceedings and the case of the Revenue is that this letter was not confronted to the Assessing Officer. CIT(A) has not allowed relief to the assessee on the basis of this letter only and in his earlier paragraphs he has already decided the issue in favour of the assessee. The said letter, being part of the official record of the Revenue, cannot be said to be a document to which the Assessing Officer had no access. In this letter, which is claimed by the Revenue to be additional evidence, the Assessing Officer has only expressed its opinion on the addition made by the Assessing Officer and has written to Jt.CIT that the additions were not sustainable. CIT(A) has not much relied on the letter and has in fact already decided the issue in favour of the assessee
|