Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Income-tax Officer, Wd-2 (2) , Durgapur Versus Nirmal Kr. Glhosh

2015 (12) TMI 705 - ITAT KOLKATA

Addition made on the ground of undisclosed investment u/s. 69 - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- We find that this deposit of security was made by assessee ten years’ back and this fact has been admitted by AO as well as CIT(A). Once the deposit is not made in the relevant assessment year, the same cannot be added. The deposit can be added only in the year when it first time introduced. Accordingly, we confirm the order of CIT(A) deleting the addition. - Decided against revenue

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s. Hence, stock of gold ornaments is automatically adjusted with respect to quantity of gold lying with the assessee, and hence, entire stock is not readily sellable to customers as it includes old gold ornaments. This stock of old gold ornaments was given to Senco Gold, Kolkata for adjustment with purchases of fresh ornaments from Senco Gold make. In this way, Senco Gold, Kolkata accepted old gold ornaments from assessee but customers while adjusting old gold ornaments with their new 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

f the above discussion and facts of the case, we are inclined to accept the contention of the assessee and hence, the order of CIT(A) on this issue is confirmed.- Decided against revenue

Addition made on the ground of income from other sources - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:-Originally, the assessee declared these amounts to be received in cash as per old ledger register. Subsequently, the assessee filed new ledger account and explained that the advance nearly 90% are recei .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

86,958/- which were outstanding as on 31.03.2009. We find that the assessee before the lower authorities filed complete details in respect of advances received by cheques and cash. In view of the above facts and circumstances, we find that the CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition - Decided against revenue - I.T.A No. 235/Kol/2013 - Dated:- 7-9-2015 - Shri S. V. Mehrotra, AM & Shri Mahavir Singh, JM For The Appellant: Shri S. M. Sarfarazut Tauheed, Sr. DR For The Respondent: Shri T. P. Kar .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

For this, revenue has raised following ground no.1: 1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A)-Durgapur erred in deleting addition made on the ground of undisclosed investment u/s. 69 for an amount of ₹ 1,00,000/-. 3. Briefly stated facts are that the AO observed from the Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2009 that the assessee had shown ₹ 700/- only as security deposit to the Franchiser M/s. Senco Gold, Kolkata. The franchiser confirmed that ₹ 1,00,000/- was the bala .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ontention that the said security deposit was made ten years back. He also observed that no facts to the contrary have been brought on record. It is also noted that the AO had made correspondence with the franchiser in spite of that no adverse finding on the assessee s claim has been given by the AO. In view of this, the CIT(A) accepted the contention of assessee and deleted the addition as made by AO. Aggrieved, revenue is in appeal before us. 4. We have heard rival submissions and gone through .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the order of CIT(A) deleting the addition made on the ground of undisclosed purchase for an amount of ₹ 9,49,463/-. For this, revenue has raised following ground no.2: 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A)-Durgapur erred in deleting addition made on the ground of undisclosed purchase for an amount of ₹ 9,49,463/-. 6. Briefly stated facts are that the AO during the course of assessment proceedings noticed that the assessee s purchases were adjusted against stand .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

usted with STD gold purchase In view of the above, the AO required the assessee to explain the aforesaid purchases adjusted because the cash book does not reflect any transaction in this regard. The assessee explained before the AO that franchise never supplied any gold bar to the assessee but they accepted 24 Kt. Gold bar in lieu of cash tendered towards adjustment of their sales. The AO did not accept the explanation of the assessee and made addition on account of undisclosed purchases amounti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

closed purchases has resulted in undisclosed sales also. Further, there is no finding in the assessment order that the appellant has invested money for this alleged purchase out of undisclosed sources. Therefore, there is no case made out by the A.O. for an addition u/s.69 of the I.T.Act. It is also to be noted that 24 carat standard gold bars are not a commodity which can be purchased and sold like any other. In my opinion, the A.O. should have looked into this issue which he clearly has not. B .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s ground of appeal is allowed. Aggrieved, revenue is in appeal before Tribunal. 7. We have heard rival submissions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. Before us and also before lower authorities the assessee produced transaction statements for FY 2008-09 given by Senco Gold, Kolkata from where it is noted that there are some transactions which represents return of gold ornaments or its equivalent. The details are as under: Date Amount VAT Total 02.05.2008 43,895.55 437.45 44,33 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ard Gold Bar Purchase of 24 Kt. from assessee by Senco Gold. The AO made addition only for the reason that in the P&L Account purchases of gold bar of 24 Kt. is not reflected and in the absence of such purchases of gold bar from Senco Gold, gold bar of 24 Kt. in stock is not feasible. We are of the view that the AO could not understand the actual operation of the business of the assessee. The assessee purchased gold from customers mainly by cheque payment and such purchases during the year 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

des old gold ornaments. This stock of old gold ornaments was given to Senco Gold, Kolkata for adjustment with purchases of fresh ornaments from Senco Gold make. In this way, Senco Gold, Kolkata accepted old gold ornaments from assessee but customers while adjusting old gold ornaments with their new purchases would not only give the ornaments of Senco Gold but also of other parties. Finally, assessee has to convert this old gold ornaments of other make into 24 Kt. gold of Senco Gold except the sa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

al is dismissed. 8. The third issue in this appeal of revenue is against the order of CIT(A) deleting the addition made on the ground of income from other sources. For this, revenue has raised following ground no.3: 3. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, ld. CIT(A), Durgapur erred in deleting addition made on the ground of income from other sources for an amount of ₹ 22,86,958/-. 9. Briefly stated facts are that the AO during the course of assessment proceedings required the ass .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

same and, stated by way of explanation that the error had occurred as a result of wrong copy paste. In my opinion, the A.O. while disposing of the issue has not considered either the explanation or the new set of figures given to him. Before rejecting the new figure the A.O. has not brought any material on record to indicate that the contention of the appellant that these were bona fide advances was not correct. I find that the A.O. has summarily rejected the new set of figures. In my opinion, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version