Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (8) TMI 292 - AT - Income TaxAddition u/s 69B on account of difference in stock statement given to the Bank - The AO called for information from Manager PNB u/s 133(6) to furnish details regarding the stock/assets hypothecated for obtaining loans/CC limit - HELD THAT:- 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 assessee, therefore, rightly contended that the stock statement submitted on 28.02.2014 prior to close of the financial year was on estimate basis and not on actual basis. The assessee also rightly contended that since assessee deals in controlled items like fertilizer and chemicals, therefore, it is subject to physical verification by Agriculture Department. No enquiries have been done by the AO from the concerned Agriculture Department with regard to discrepancy in the stock. It may also be noted here that in the preceding AY 2013-14 the similar addition was deleted by the Ld. CIT(A) following the judgment of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Sidhu Rice & General Mills [2004 (7) TMI 12 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] . Therefore,CIT(A) should not have taken a contrary view in assessment year under appeal. The decisions relied upon by Ld. Counsel for assessee squarely applied to the facts and circumstances of the case. The issue is, therefore, covered by these decisions in favour of the assessee. It is well settled law that Revenue authorities are bound to follow the rule of consistency. Thus the addition is wholly unjustified - Decided in favour of assessee. Addition on account of low household withdrawal - HELD THAT:- It is not in dispute that family of the assessee consists of self and his wife only. The assessee resides in his own house and has sufficient ancestral agricultural land. The assessee has agricultural income also. The AO has not brought any evidence on record to justify the estimate of household expenses in a sum of ₹ 20,000/- per month. The AO did not doubt the explanation given by the assessee that household expenses withdrawn by the assessee and agricultural income are sufficient to maintain the family. It may also be noted here that in preceding AY 2013-14 Ld. CIT(A) considered the same issue in the appellate order dated 25.04.2017 and on identical facts deleted the addition on account of enhancing the household expenses. CIT(A) noted in the appellate order that during assessment year under appeal i.e. 2013-14 assessee had withdrawn a sum of ₹ 1,12,010/-. The further addition made by the AO was deleted as against household expenses of AY 2013-14, there is a substantial increase in household expenses withdrawn by assessee in assessment year under appeal. CIT(A), therefore, should not have taken a contrary view in assessment year under appeal. The addition is made merely on estimate basis. Therefore, same is liable to be deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|