TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 56X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 from Nidhi Sales, which is verifiable from the purchase a/c submitted to the AO during assessment proceedings. There being no corroborative evidence in support of the entry found in the loose seized document, addition made u/s 69 is directed to be deleted – Decided in favor of assessee. - ITA No. 2483/Del/12 - - - Dated:- 27-7-2012 - SHRI D.K. TYAGI AND B.C. MEENA, JJ. Appellant by : Shri M.L. Jain Adv. Respondent by : Shri D.K. Mishra DR ORDER PER D.K. TYAGI, J.M:: This is assessee s appeal against CIT(A) s order dated 26-3-2012, relating to A.Y. 2009-10. 2. The assessee has raised as many as 7 grounds to challenge the action of CIT(A) in sustaining the addition of Rs. 2,20,800/- made by the Assessin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k of Supari was 25555 Kg. On 1-04-2008. There is a difference of 1921 Kg. Of Supari in opening stock of 01-04- 2008. Explain the discrepancy. The above specific question was replied by the appellant by saying that the stock of supari as on 1-4-2008 was at 25555 kg. Which was in accordance with the stock register. This was the correct position of stock of Supari. However, the excise department took stock of supari at 27475.9 kg. Without weighment and on estimate basis . The above explanation of the appellant presupposes that the statement found on loose sheet depicting the stock as on 01/04/2008 is not an unauthorized document but has been submitted by the appellant to the Excise Authorities. The explanation of the appellant that the sto ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urvey belong to that person or to prove his hand writing or signature thereon or that contents of such books of account or documents are true. Such a person cannot just take a plea without cogent evidence that such books of account or documents have been left by some stranger and he doesn t know anything about the same. He is required to offer a reasonable explanation regarding the nature of such books of account or documents found in his possession or control and if the same is claimed to be belonging to somebody else, then also he is required to explain as to whom the same belong and as to how the same has come into his possession that too by leading cogent evidence. No doubt, the presumption available u/s 292C is a rebuttable presumpti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not rejected books of account of the assessee. Obviously the opening stock as on 1-4-2008 would be the closing stock as on 31-3-2008, which a per stock register is 25,555 kg. and accepted by the department for A.Y. 2008-09. There is no purchase of supari as on 1-4-2008, as the first purchase bill of supari is through bill no. 51 dated 2-4-08 from Nidhi Sales, which is verifiable from the purchase a/c submitted to the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings. Ld. counsel submitted that the addition has been made only on the basis of loose sheet found during survey without bringing any material to corroborate the entry found therein and no further inquiry was made by the Assessing Officer in this behalf. It was further submitted that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of stand and varying explanations, Assessing Officer was perfectly justified in making the addition. In support the ld. DR placed reliance on the decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Bharti Telecom Finance Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2008) 296 ITR 249 (Del.). 8. In rejoinder ld. counsel argued that the case law relied on by the revenue is distinguishable on facts. In the case of Hiren Vasantla Shah (supra) relied upon by the revenue, document was found which pertained to return of money already advanced. Thus, the document was in fact supporting the earlier event i.e. advancing of the money by the assessee, which was not denied by the assessee. Ld. counsel submitted that in the case in hand the entry found in the loose paper is not sup ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
