Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (11) TMI 925 - AT - Income TaxDeemed income u/s 69/69A/69B r.w.s.115BBE - income surrendered and offered to tax by the assessee on account of excess stock, advances and excess-cash found during survey - while filing return of income assessee faithfully honoured his surrender and disclosed additional income as “Income from Business” u/s 28 and paid taxes @ normal rate of tax as applicable to business income - assessee’s main contention was such he was aged about 72 years at the time of survey and his sole source of income was the manufacturing business of footwear for more than 35 years and the excess-stock, advances and cash were the outcome of suppressed business income over the years; no other source of income except the same business had been found during survey HELD THAT:- Excess-Stock - Once the facts emerging from record shows that the excess stock found during survey was a part of entire lot of stock of assessee, part of which is recorded in books of account and part of the same was not found recorded and therefore, treated as excess stock at the time of survey and consequently surrendered by the assessee and also offered to tax in the return of income then the excess stock cannot be treated as deemed income u/s 69 or 69B of the act in view of the judgment of Bajarang Traders [2017 (11) TMI 388 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] and Anoop Neema [2022 (1) TMI 683 - ITAT INDORE]. The lower-authorities are not justified to hold excess-stock as something which was not business income and thereby invoke deeming provisions of section 69 or 69B read with section 115BBE. The orders of the authorities below qua this issue is set aside. The assessee succeeds to this extent. Advances for purchase of raw-material - CIT(A) has clearly mentioned that the assessee admitted the advances as “unaccounted business income” during survey. Then, we also find that acting upon such admission, the assessee has recorded income in books of account and offered in income-tax return. Then in such a situation, we do not find any reason to tinker with the nature of income declared by assessee in the survey, more particularly when the advances are related to and part of business of assessee and the revenue has no evidence to prove otherwise. Therefore, we do not find any justification on the part of lower-authorities in invoking section 69 read with section 115BBE of the act. The orders of the authorities below qua this issue is set aside. The assessee succeeds to this extent. Excess-Cash - We find that the assessee is an individual who can have cash from any source. Even if the cash is physically kept at business premise, it cannot be said that it was part of business income. We further find that the CIT(A) has given contemporary findings and also rightly relied upon decision of ITAT, Indore in Shyam Lal Goyal (supra). It is to be noted that the Ld. AR has not proved by means of statement recorded during survey or by any other evidence that the impugned excess-cash represented business income of assessee. Therefore, we have no basis to interfere with the conclusion taken by CIT(A) holding excess-cash as deemed income u/s 69A attracting higher rate of tax u/s 115BBE. The assessee fails to this extent. Appeal of assessee is partly allowed.
|