TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 985X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iture - Value of closing stock at lower than the tag price - Held that:- On the basis of the above facts, we find that the value of closing stock at lower than the tag price of the furniture by 50% so held by the Tribunal is a possible view. No substantial question of law. - Income Tax Appeal No. 1506 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 14-3-2017 - M. S. Sanklecha And A. K. Menon, JJ. Ms. S.V. Bharucha for the appellant Dr. K. Shivram, Senior Counsel a/w Mr. Rahul Hakani for the respondent ORDER P. C. 1. This Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenges the order dated 26th February, 2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). The impugned order is in respect of Assessment Year ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edings, the respondent explained that the excess stock found on the date of the survey as belonging to an associated concern of the Karta of the respondent HUF. This was in accordance with the statement made by the Karta of the respondent assessee HUF soon after the survey. It was submitted during the assessment proceedings that if the stock belonging to others i.e. the Karta of HUF, M/s. Madani Enterprises and M/s. S.M. Modular Kitchen as in its possession on the date of the search, is excluded, then the physical stock found on the date of the survey tallied with stock in its books of accounts. So far as the valuation of the closing stock having a price lower than the tag price is concerned, the respondent assessee pointed out that the val ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, the CIT(A) partly allowed the respondent assessee's appeal. 6. Being aggrieved, both the Revenue as well as the respondent assessee preferred appeals from the order dated 31st May, 2011 to the Tribunal. So far as deduction of excess stock found on the date of survey is concerned, the impugned order records the fact that normally recording statements in respect of physical inventory of the stock by asking the person making the statement on behalf of the party whether the stock found on the date of the survey belongs to assessee or some other party. However, this was not done in the present facts. The Departmental representative accepted the above factual position before the Tribunal. Further, on 29th August, 2005, the Karta of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he valuation of inventory at 30% less than the tag price. This acceptance of 30% less then the tag price by the CIT(A) was based on mere guesswork particularly in view of the fact that the books of accounts of the assessee were accepted by the Assessing Officer. 8. In the above facts, the impugned order holds that the valuation of stock at 30% less than the tag price was not sustainable and it should be valued 50% less than the tag price as claimed, should be accepted. 9. Ms. Bharucha, learned Counsel for the Revenue assails the impugned order by merely reiterating the order of the Assessing Officer. 10. Regarding Question Nos. (i) (ii) : (a) On the basis of the aforesaid facts, we note that both the CIT(A) as well as the Trib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
