TMI Blog2013 (8) TMI 706X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... potential for exposition of any legal theory or concept, the appeal is not maintainable under Section 260A of the Act - Decided against assessee. - ITA No.86 of 2012 (O&M), ITA No.87 of 2012 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 1-8-2013 - Rajive Bhalla And Dr. Bharat Bhushan Parsoon,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Pankaj Jain, Advocate. ORDER Dr. Bharat Bhushan Parsoon , J. These two income tax appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the 1961 Act) are directed against order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench-A, Chandigarh passed in ITA No.718/CHD/ 2011 dated 28.9.2011 for assessment year 2007-08. Both these appeals are being decided by this common judgment as matter in issue to be adjudicated is the same. For convenience and clarity, facts have been taken from ITA No.86 of 2012 and decision is being rendered in both the said appeals. Facts of the case: The appellant, who is a proprietor of the firm, is a commission agent, engaged in the business of trading in foodgrains. On 19.1.2007, a survey under Section 133-A of the 1961 Act was carried out on the business premises of the appellant. During the course of survey proceedings vid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess. It is claimed that corresponding account books of the parties (to whom sale of paddy and rice was made) had also been gone through by the Assessing Officer and no defect was found therein even after cross verification from the delivery and transit challans of form ST-38, as also on verification of payments from the bank accounts. It is further averred that the method of market value of the sold rice adopted by the Assessing Officer was wrong as in such a case, rate of parties would generally differ. It is contended that due to financial constraints andalso the fact that the appellant-firm had suffered losses in the past some years, the assessee had sold its stock at the price, whatsoever became available in the market so as to clear the stocks. Plea of the Revenue: Whereas plea of the revenue per contra is that the assessee had fudged the accounts and that it had also been indulging in under-billing. It is explained that neither books of accounts of the assessee could be tallied with the corresponding entries from the traders with whom it had been transacting business nor from the allied agencies of sales tax Department as also from the banks. Appraisal of rival claims ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the assessee. Consequently, finding that the assessee had concealed income to the extent of Rs.1,97,364/-, the same was added in its income for the purpose of tax. Certain incriminating documents had also been found in the premises of the appellant-assessee during the course of survey proceedings and those were then impounded. Transactions recorded in the said incriminating documents were found to be worth Rs.12,94,775/-. Reply filed by the assessee was not found to be genuine and acceptable as no details of purchase, sale, quantity and rate of such recorded transactions were given. Sequelly, addition of Rs.12,94,775/- was disallowed under Section 69 of the Act and the said amount was added towards taxable income. It was also found from certain other incriminating documents that certain transactions had been found recorded therein, for which there was no corresponding entries available in the books of accounts of the assessee. Sequelly, difference of Rs.2,68,504/- was disallowed under Section 69 of the Act and was added to the income of the assessee. On submission of income tax return by the assessee after the survey proceedings, it was noticed that the assessee had deposit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nishing inaccurate particulars of income in its returns. Out of these additions made by the Assessing Officer, Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had completely approved additions only in respect of serial No.(v) and (vi) and had partly allowed in respect of items at sr. No.(i) and (ii). During the course of appeal proceedings, it was noticed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that the rice had been sold for more than the purchase price except for sale made on 4.3.2007, i.e., subsequent to the date of survey. In short, there was no justification offered by the assessee for sale of rice @ Rs.630/- per quintal which had been purchased by it during the year itself for Rs.925/- per quintal. The Assessing Officer had taken the sale price of the rice to be Rs.1,035/- but the CIT(A) had rejected the said price and had taken the rice to be sold for Rs.931/- per quintal. Accepting the plea of the assessee to this extent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had remitted this matter to the Assessing Officer for working out the additions on this count. Additions made as per details at Sr.No.(iii) and (iv) on the back page were deleted. So far as addition of Rs.5.30 lacs men ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tax Appellate Tribunal to persuade us that the books of accounts were genuine and had periodically been got audited from an independent agency and were also subject to scrutiny by the sales tax authorities as he was also a dealer having sales tax number as a dealer under Haryana VAT Act 2003 and Rules thereof. The revenue, on the other hand, has asserted validity and legality of the impugned order of the Tribunal while casting genuineness of books of accounts of the assessee. Notwithstanding some relief having been given by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to the assessee, it remains a fact that all the authorities right from the Assessing Officer to the Tribunal have consistently held against the genuineness of the books of accounts of the appellant. Relevant observations of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as also of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal have already been reproduced in earlier part of this judgment. When questions of law framed by the assessee are mapped on the canvass of facts and circumstances of this case, it turns out to be clearly a case which has no legal implications to be resolved and rather is entirely dependent upon fact situations which have adeq ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
