Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (9) TMI 281 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance of interest - Valuation of inventory - as per CIT-A assessee should have taken into consideration the interest attributable to bringing the inventory to its present location and condition in accordance with explanation to section 145A(A) - HELD THAT:- Valuation of inventory should be in accordance with the method of accounting regularly employed by the assessee and is to be further adjusted to include the amount of any tax, duty, cess or fee (by whatever name called) actually paid or incurred by the assessee to bring the goods to the place of its location and condition as on the date of valuation and as per the explanation it is provided that for this purpose, any tax, duty, shares or fee by whatever name called under any law for the time being in force and it shall include all such payments notwithstanding any right arising as a consequence to such payment. There is no such provision in this section to include interest cost in the value of inventory. Tribunal order cited of DLF Ltd.,. [2016 (12) TMI 1295 - DELHI HIGH COURT] supports the case of the assessee and therefore, respectfully following this Tribunal order and in view of the above discussion, we decide this issue in favour of the assessee. Non genuine payment - Addition of payments were otherwise than by an account payee cheque - disallowance was made by the AO on this basis that the AO issued notices to verify these transactions under section 133(6) of the Act and these notices were sent by the AO by Speed Post Acknowledgement Due (SPAD) to the 10 entities out of 28 entities on a Test Check Basis but these notices has been returned unserved - HELD THAT:- We set aside the order of CIT(A) on this issue and restore this matter back to the file of AO for a fresh decision with the direction that the assessee should furnish the comparison of quantity of opening stock + purchase and closing stock + sales and if there is no difference in such two quantities and difference, if any is explained/reconciled then quantity of purchase should be accepted and in case of unexplained difference in such two quantities, only such unexplained difference in quantity should held to be bogus claim. Regarding the pricing part also, the assessee should bring on record necessary details and evidences in support of the price paid by the assessee. The AO should also examine the reasonableness of such pricing and then pass necessary order - Ground allowed for statistical purposes. Disallowance of commission payment - CIT-A deleted the addition - HELD THAT:- There is no finding of the CIT(A) that the documents and evidences required by the AO as noted by him in the assessment order were submitted before the AO or before CIT(A). In the absence of required details and documents regarding receipt of services from the agents, it is not proper to delete the disallowance of commission payment. No such document was brought on record even by way of additional evidence and therefore, on this issue, we reverse the order of learned CIT(A) and restore that of the AO. - Decided in favour of revenue. Addition u/s 40A - CIT-A deleted the addition accepting additional evidence - HELD THAT:- In view of these details available in the Paper Book filed by the assessee containing 103 pages, it is seen that details are made available as per which it is made clear that all these payments are made by account payee cheques and as per the certificate given in the Paper Book, all these documents were made available by the assessee before both AO and learned CIT(A) and therefore, there is no violation of Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, also, as alleged by Revenue in ground of this appeal.
|