TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 1725X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. During the course of survey Inventory of stock was taken by the Survey Team in the presence of the main Director of the assessee company Smt. Asha Rani Singhal and inventory was valued at ₹ 7,02,39,612/-. The details of this inventory alongwith valuation were provided to authorized representative for his comments. The Assessee s representative filed a letter in which inventory and the valuation was except the following items:- Sr. No. Name Code Size Quantity Total Rate Value 26 Zip YKK SFL 43x2000 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was the same item, the similar ready zipper is listed on page 1 item no. 21 size 32 inch is valued as ₹ 6.93 per pc. Even if we presume as this was the same item in roll, the per mtr. Cost will not more than ₹ 5.85 per mtr. Please see YKK India dealer price list as attached. Therefore the valuation of this item by department is still wrong. Secondly the item as tape is also not recorded correctly here. We do not have any item of chain in Roll of 1000 mtr. Each nor is any item listed in YKK as Tape. Tape is a part of Zip in Roll and side part of any zip is called as Tape. If that was just a tape only, it can be hardly or any value of ₹ 2 per mtr. Moreover we had never buy or sold any item named as just tape. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8,85,756/-. If this value is reduced from the valuation of ₹ 7,02,39,612/- then the new valuation of stock comes to ₹ 4,53,53,856/-. As against this the valuation as per the books of account as on the date of survey i.e. 7th September, 2006 comes to 3,99,06,530/-. The difference in the valuation of physical stock as worked out here in above and the books stock as worked out by the assessee on the date of survey is ₹ 54,47,326/-. 3. Upon assessee s appeal Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) elaborately considered the issue. This issue to be decided be me as to whether the rate applied at ₹ 59.48 per meter by the Assessing Officer is correct or not. After going through the records I am also of the opinio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the total is ₹ 188,400 meter, valuing ₹ 63,22,704/- as against valuation of ₹ 1,12,06,032/- done by the assessing officer @ ₹ 59.48 per meter. Accordingly, addition of ₹ 48,83,328/- be deleted and the assessee ill be given relief for the same. Considering the case in totality I hold that truth lies somewhere in between and it (the rate) is not ₹ 59.48 per meter as computed by the Assessing Officer and again it is not ₹ 33.56 per meter as offered by the appellant voluntarily before me on 7.7.10. contrary to the figure of the both the appellant and the Assessing Officer, I find ₹ 37.96 is the rate per meter for good number of items and justice will be dispensed if we keep the rate at &# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 13,92,958/- Hence the concealment is restricted to ₹ 13,92,958/- and the appellant will get a relief of ₹ 40,54,368/-. 4. Against the above order the assessee and revenue in appeal before us. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the records. We find that survey tem has done the valuation @ 191.60. We find that the Assessing Officer has adopted the rate of 59.48 for valuation of the inventory. This relates to the item which had the maximum rate. We fail to understand how this can be applied, without finding any relationship of this rate with the impugned item. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has given the finding that Assessing Officer has taken the maximum rate as given in Sl. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
