Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 91 - AT - Income TaxAddition on account of Excess Stock - suppression of the stock of bullion - argued Revised stock tally wherein all the quantity of Sale as per Bills and Stock match - HELD THAT:- Considering the two fold contentions of the ld. A.R we find substantial force in the same, viz (i). that the CIT(Appeal) by taking recourse to a self-contradictory approach had wrongly refused to consider the assessee's revised stock statement; and (ii). that the A.O had erred in not considering the net weight (i.e weight of 99.50% purity gold as mentioned in the invoices) of the aforementioned two sale transactions in question, viz. (a) Invoice No. V4, dated 29.03.2013 of 560.560 grams (gross weight) i.e 95% purity which on conversion into 99.50% purity was reduced to 532.5 grams (net weight); and (b). Invoice No. V5, dated 30.03.2013 of 909.560 grams (gross weight) i.e. 88% purity which on conversion into 99.59% purity was reduced to 800.4 grams (net weight). We herein vacate the addition made by the Assessing Officer towards the alleged suppression of the stock of bullion. Accordingly, we set-aside the order of the CIT(Appeal) to the extent he had upheld the addition made by the A.O. The Ground of appeal No. 1 is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations. Unexplained cash deposit in the assessee's bank account - unexplained money Addition u/s 69A - HELD THAT:- Department in exercise of its powers u/s. 226(3) of the Act may call upon a banker to pay the money held in the account of the assessee towards discharge of the latter arrears due towards the department. In sum and substance, the aforesaid statutory provision, i.e. Section 226(3) of the Act clearly recognizes the amount lying in the bank account of the assessee as 'money'. In the backdrop of the aforesaid position of law, we are of the considered view that a meaning of the term 'money' different to that as provided in sub-section (3) of Section 226 of the Act would neither be permissible nor justified. We, thus, in terms of our aforesaid observations are unable to concur with the claim of the ld. AR that as the amount lying in the assessee's saving bank account with State Bank of Patiala, Branch :Kanak mandi, Hoshiarpur would not fall within the meaning of 'money', therefore, the CIT(Appeals) had wrongly triggered the provisions of section 69A of the Act and subjected to the same to tax. Accordingly, finding no infirmity in the view taken by the CIT(A) that the unexplained cash deposits in the assessee's bank account was liable to be brought to tax under Sec. 69A of the Act, we uphold the same. The Ground of appeal No. 2 raised by the assessee is dismissed.
|