Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (8) TMI 83 - ITAT BANGALORE

2016 (8) TMI 83 - ITAT BANGALORE - TMI - Addition u/s 68 - whether items sold in the present year is the same which was declared by the assessee under VDIS - Held that:- As per the confirmation of the buyer M/s S. Babulal & Co., Ahmedabad, he has purchased from the assessee cut and polished Diamonds of 18.55 carat for ₹ 5,00,050/-. The dispute is only about this amount of ₹ 500,050/- and hence other bills etc. are not relevant. It is seen that although, the carats quantity as per VDI .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lour of diamonds are also not known because the same is not mentioned in the purchase confirmation or in the VDIS declaration. Hence it is seen that the assessee has failed to establish that the diamonds sold in the present year and declared under VDIS are same. - Thus the assessee has failed to establish this fact that he Diamonds sold in the present year are the same Diamonds which declared by the assessee in VDIS declaration 1997 as directed by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court and therefo .....

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 they are against the appellant are opposed to law, equity, and weight of evidence, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the case. 2 The appellant denies to be assessed at ₹ 5,97,330/-/-against the declared total income of ₹ 84,070/- on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3 The learned CIT (A) is not justified in confirming the addition of ₹ 5,00,050/- under section 68 of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 4 The learned CIT(A) was not justified in co .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ot justified on facts in not considering the diamonds on hand with the appellant as per the declaration, to be the same diamonds sold on the facts and circumstances of the case. 7.Without prejudice to the right to seek waiver with the Hon'ble Chief Commissioner of Income Tax/Director General of Income Tax, the Appellant denies itself liable to be charged to interest under section 234B of the Act which under the facts and circumstances of the case deserves to be cancelled. The calculation of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uity. 3. It was submitted by the ld.AR of the assessee that this matter reached up to the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in the first round and as per the judgment of the Hon ble Karnataka High Court in ITA No.188/2004 dated 22-09-2008, copy submitted by the ld. AR of the assessee, Hon ble High Court restored the matter to the file of the AO for fresh decision. He has drawn our attention to para-10 of the judgment of the Hon ble High Court and pointed out that this is the direction of the Hon 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

peated the same addition and therefore, the addition made by the lower authorities is not justified and the same should be deleted. He also submitted copy of two Tribunal orders rendered in the case of Shri Shjyam B Habib Vs ITO in ITA No.819B)/2016 dated 30-06-2016 and in the case of Smt Umabai M Kothari Vs ITO in ITA No.86,106 & 268(B)/2016 and placed reliance on the same. 4. The ld. DR of the revenue supported the orders of the authorities below. He also submitted that on page 9 of his or .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

report submitted along with VDIS declaration is available on page no.2 of the paper book and in lieu of the sale bill, confirmation of the buyer is available on page 4 to 6 of the paper book in which the details are given by the buyer about the items purchased by the buyer. 6. I have considered the rival submissions. I find that the direction of the Hon ble High Court in the case of assessee itself is this that if the assessee is able to establish that the items sold in the present year is the s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

1.35 1 33,750 3. 3.25 3 58,500 4. 15.3 12 99,750 Total……….. 2,40,000 7. As per the confirmation of the buyer M/s S. Babulal & Co., Ahmedabad, he has purchased from the assessee cut and polished Diamonds of 18.55 carat for ₹ 5,00,050/-. The dispute is only about this amount of ₹ 500,050/- and hence other bills etc. are not relevant. It is seen that although, the carats quantity as per VDIS declaration and purchase confirmation is tallying but the carat quanti .....

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 purchase confirmation or in the VDIS declaration. Hence it is seen that the assessee has failed to establish that the diamonds sold in the present year and declared under VDIS are same. 9. Now I examine the applicability of two Tribunal orders cited by the ld.AR of the assessee. First Tribunal order is rendered in the case of Shri Shyam B Habib Vs ITO (Supra) and in para-5 of the Tribunal order, it is noted by the Tribunal that the weight of Gold and silver bullion is the same but there is n .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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