GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
What's New Case Laws Highlights Articles News Forum Short Notes Statutory TMI SMS More ...
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (7) TMI 867 - ITAT AHMEDABAD

2015 (7) TMI 867 - ITAT AHMEDABAD - TMI - Unaccounted cash purchases - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- Addition by Assessing Officer has been made on the basis of statement of partner of assessee recorded u/s.133A(1)(iii) of the IT Act, 1961. In statement recorded, no mention has been made about any sales out of unaccounted purchases. Assessing Officer did not make sufficient inquiry to come to the reasonable conclusion that unaccounted purchases of cotton was also sold before the date .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

de. - Decided against revenue.

G.P addition - addition of ₹ 1,77,010/- representing the G.P., made to the total income of assessee as undisclosed income - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- Addition has been made relating to unaccounted purchases made in cash prior to the date of survey. There is nothing on record to suggest that unaccounted sale of these goods purchased in this had been affected prior to the date of survey. Assessing Officer was not able to establish tha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

are covered under the exemptions provided under Rule 6DD of IT Rules. In view of above, CIT(A) was justified in deleting the disallowance made u/s. 40A(3) of the Act amounting to ₹ 56,759/-. Same is upheld. ₹ 1,77,010/ was rightly deleted by CIT(A). We uphold the same. - Decided against revenue. - ITA. No. 3484/Ahd/2010 - Dated:- 22-7-2015 - Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav and Shri Anil Chaturvedi, JJ. For the Petitioner :Shri Narendra Singh, Sr. D.R. For the Respondent :Shri P. B. Parma .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ored the fact that such disclosure was made over and above the excess stock found during the survey, and the onus was on the part of the Assessee to show that such purchases had not been sold outside the books of account and that, the unaccounted stock found during the survey included such unaccounted cash purchases. 2. The Ld. CIT(A)-XX, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of ₹ 1,77,010/- representing the G.P. earned from the sale of the unaccounted purchases, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

survey. 3. The Ld. CIT(A)-XX, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in holding that the Gujarat Electricity Board (GEB), to whom a cash payment was made, was the Government itself as envisaged under Rule 6DD of the I.T, Rules and hence, such payment was outside the purview of section 40A(3) of the I.T, Act. - 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 5. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the CIT(A) be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eclaration a/c. However, the assessee firm did not added Rs.l,77,010/- from stock declaration and Rs.l1,46,000/- out of undisclosed purchase in cash. On being asked to the AR of the assessee firm, it was submitted vide his letter dated 03-11-2009 that "As per Profit & Loss account, we have shown credit of ₹ 5,79,000/- respect to assets and ₹ 32,56,207/- for stock of material (finished & raw) against total declaration of ₹ 51,58,217/-on 28-2-2007. (1) ₹ 11,46, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ay i.e. on 03-11-2009 and served by RPAD on 07-11-2009. The said reply is reproduced in para:2 of this order. First of all, one thing should be clear that whatever amount is accepted as unaccounted income or concealed income, whether in cash or in kind and accepted by the assessee (here by the partner of the assessee firm) cannot be retracted by any other interpretation. The acceptation is the final outcome of the survey action. Secondly, it was agreed upon by the partner of the assessee firm th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

/- and Rs.l,77,010/- (total ₹ 13,23,010/-) is, hereby added to the total income of the assessee. 2.1 Matter was carried before the First Appellate Authority, wherein various contentions were raised on behalf of assessee with regards to addition in question and having considered the same CIT(A) granted relief to the assessee. Same has been opposed on behalf of Revenue. Learned Departmental Representative requested to set aside the order of CIT(A) and that of Assessing Officer be restored. O .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sessing Officer had made discussion only about purchase recorded in these sheets of paper found during course of survey operations being unaccounted. Assessing Officer has not referred to any sheet of paper in particular to show that the goods purchases unaccounted have been sold during course of business of assessee prior to the date of survey. Addition by Assessing Officer has been made on the basis of statement of partner of assessee recorded u/s.133A(1)(iii) of the IT Act, 1961. In statement .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

xcess during course of survey. In view of above, separate addition of ₹ 11,46,000/- made by Assessing Officer was not justified. Same was rightly deleted by CIT(A). This factual finding of CIT(A) needs no interference from our side. We uphold the same. 3. Next issue is with regards to addition of ₹ 1,77,010/- representing the G.P., made to the total income of assessee as undisclosed income. Assessing Officer has made addition on the ground that the partner of assessee firm admitted i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r alia submitting that order of CIT(A) on the issue be set aside and that of Assessing Officer be restored. On other hand, learned Authorized Representative supported the order of CIT(A). 3.2 After going through rival submissions and material on record, we find that addition has been made relating to unaccounted purchases made in cash prior to the date of survey. There is nothing on record to suggest that unaccounted sale of these goods purchased in this had been affected prior to the date of su .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Advanced Search


Latest Notifications:

    Dated      Category

20-7-2017 Cus (NT)

20-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

19-7-2017 IT

19-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 CE (NT)

18-7-2017 CE

18-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

15-7-2017 Kerala SGST

14-7-2017 Andhra Pradesh SGST

14-7-2017 Cus (NT)

14-7-2017 Cus

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 ADD

13-7-2017 ADD

12-7-2017 Jammu & Kashmir SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 CGST Rate

More Notifications


Latest Circulars:

21-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

20-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

20-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

19-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

19-7-2017 Income Tax

18-7-2017 Customs

17-7-2017 Customs

14-7-2017 Income Tax

13-7-2017 Central Excise

13-7-2017 Customs

More Circulars



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version