9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 1144X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ved in this appeal relates to the allowance of loss incurred by the assessee on account of theft of jewellery though the claim made to the insurance company had been rejected. None appeared on behalf of the assessee even though the case was earlier adjourned for today on the request of the assesse's counsel. We noted that on earlier three occasions also the case was adjourned on one pretext or the other on the request of the assessee's counsel. On 01/05/2017, the assessee's counsel, Advocate Shri Sashank, has duly noted the date fixed for hearing of 11.09.2017. We, therefore, proceed to dispose of the appeal after hearing the learned DR and on the basis of the material available on record. 3. After hearing the learned DR and going through the orders of the tax authorities below, we noted that the assessee firm is engaged in the business of manufacturing and dealing in gold jewellery, precious stones and F & O. The assessee filed the return of income on 23.09.2010 declaring the total income at Rs. 2,02,810/-, which was processed u/s. 143(1). Subsequently, the assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) on 18.03.2013, by making addition of Rs. 93,69,402/- by disallowing the loss incurred b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not reflect the amount of wages and signature of the employees in the available column. Further, the assessee submitted a detailed note along with handwritten stock register in which entries of issue of 11,382 gms gold ornaments to Sri Ramesh Khandelwal and Shri Manish K Nanavati for tour to Hyderabad on October 27 were noted. A copy of vouchers bearing no.71 and 76 dated October 27 showing issue of 6,752.500 gms and 4,629.700 gms respectively to Shri Ramesh Khandelwal and Shri Manish K Nanavati were also provided. However, the Assessing Officer did not accept the contentions of the assessee and took a view that on the basis of probability, none of the prudent business man would in one go send 1/4th of its total gold through the employees by bus for making sales outside the city. The Assessing Officer therefore, disallowed the alleged loss and added a sum of Rs. 93,69,402/- to the income of the assessee. On appeal, the CIT(A) has appreciated all the facts and evidence including the FIR as well as the stock statement, muster roll along with the voucher nos. 71 & 76 showing the issue of gold ornaments of 6,752.500 gms and 4,629.700 gms respectively to Shri Ramesh Khandelwal and Shri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the Magistrate). The magistrate in his order dated 25/02/2011 released the three employees of the appellant from the charges framed against them and directed that the case against the fourth accused (cleaner of the bus) should be continued. 5.7. Later on a claim was made before the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. After making its inquiries the insurance company in its letter dated 28/04/2008 rejected the claim of the appellant. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. held that the issue voucher and stock receipt register maintained by the appellant did not show the itemized details of the gold ornaments carried. The entries only showed the total weight and no description of the ornaments carried was given. Further the Insurance Company also stated that the wages register maintained by the appellant did not show the amount of wages and the signature of the employees under the appropriate columns. The Insurance Company found that no other evidences like salary vouchers or salary register were provided to the Insurance Company. 5.8.In the assessment order the A.O held that enough evidence was not on record to prove that the appellant's employees and the partner's son did n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... early the details of purchases and the sales made which also contain quantitative details. The register maintained shows that items of jewellery weighing more thanll.382 kg of gold were available with the appellant. While the stock available in October 2007 was 22678.49 grams of jewellery, 11382.2 grams of jewellery was given for carrying the same to Hyderabad. The claim that jewellery weighing 11382.2 grams was carried by the four persons on 28/10/2007 and the same was loss, is therefore, established. The rejection of the appellant's claim by the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd based on defects in some of the register maintained by the appellant, has no relevance on the issue of the loss of jewellery. 5.10. The appellant also relied on a few decisions in support of its claim. In the case of Shri Ram Hari Ram Jewellers vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax reported at 48 ITD 175 (DELHI) (TM) the facts are similar to the facts in the case of the appellant. In this case relied upon by the appellant, the ITAT allowed the claim of the assessee on account of theft of gold jewellery from its shop premises. In view of the above, the appellant's claim for deduction of Rs. 93,69 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
