Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2023 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (2) TMI 865 - HC - Income TaxAddition under the heading “Trading Account” being the estimated profit at the rate of 8.4% on the excess stock - HELD THAT:- Tribunal took note of the facts recorded by the authorities and found that there was no dispute that the assessee was dealing in clothes and hosiery wherein stock has been inventorised by the survey team in the presence of the partners of the assessee and the same was valued which was in excess of what was entered in the books of accounts. Thus, in the absence of any explanation given by the assessee either before the AO or before the CIT(A) or before the Tribunal, the Tribunal rejected the plea. Thus, we find that the learned Tribunal rightly took note of the facts and refused to interfere with the order passed by the CIT(A) which had granted partial relief to the assessee and in the absence of any error or perversity in the order passed by the Tribunal, we are not inclined to interfere with the same. Accordingly, the substantial question of law no.1 is answered against the assessee. Estimating the profit on excess stock on the basis of Khata itself - HELD THAT:- Tribunal, on going through the entire facts, held that the assessee did not produce any material to substantiate their submission and rebut the findings recorded by the AO which was affirmed by the CIT(A). Therefore, in absence of any evidence produced by the assessee, the addition was sustained. We find that there is no error in the approach of the Tribunal which had taken note of the facts, more particularly, that the assessee failed to discharge the burden cast upon him but producing evidence. For such reason, the substantial question of law no.2 is answered against the assessee. Money paid to the different parties by the assessee-firm - payments were not found recorded in the books of account of the assessee firm - AO treated the same as undisclosed income and added it to the total income - HELD THAT:- Tribunal noted that the assessee could not produce any evidence or material before the lower authorities or before the Tribunal and merely stated that the transactions were not related to the business of the assessee-firm. Tribunal noted that despite opportunity granted by the Tribunal on the earlier occasion when the matter was remanded to the AO for fresh decision, the assessee did not avail the opportunity. This could be confirmed by perusal of the assessment order from which it is seen that in spite of repeated notices issued to the assessee, the assessee did not turn up nor respond to those notices thus showing that the did not cooperate in the assessment proceedings. Thus, we find no error in the order passed by the learned Tribunal confirming the said addition - Decided against assessee.
|