TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 655X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ason that the assessee had not given necessary reply. However on perusal of the Audit Report we find that this loss was very well reported in the Tax Audit Report which is placed at page-23 of the paper book at Annexure- III to the Audit Report. The details shows that the assessee had opening stock of soyabean oil at 796.8 quintal and purchase during the year is 49946.96 quintal and sale during the year is 49139.25 quintal. The loss of soyabean oil is merely 0.05% of the total soyabean oil sold during the year which is in consonance with the business activity consistently carried out by the assessee. In these given facts no addition was called for the quantity loss in soyabean oil . Thus Ground No.1,2 3 of the assessee s appeal are allowed. Addition for estimated Gross Profit by rejecting the book results - HELD THAT:- Since the additions made by the Ld. A.O for the alleged discrepancies noticed in the books of accounts have already been deleted by us there remains no basis for the Ld. A.O of rejecting the book results since there is no plausible reason left to reject the book results. Whatever discrepancies were noticed have already been dealt by us and the addition so made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be kindly held that the findings of the learned lower authorities that the assessee had sold sarky khali of ₹ 75894 without having any stock on that day are wholly wrong and unjustified and, therefore, such findings be quashed and the addition of ₹ 75894 be kindly deleted. (3) That on the facts in the circumstances of the case and in law, and having regard to the explanation furnished, it be kindly held that the assessee had genuinely incurred transit business loss in soyabeen account at ₹ 102825. The findings of the learned lower authorities for not accepting such genuine loss are wholly wrong, unlawful and unjustified and, therefore, such findings be quashed and the loss claimed at ₹ 102825 be kindly accepted. (4) That on the facts in the circumstances of the case and in law, and having regard to the explanation furnished before the learned lower authorities, the learned CIT(A) is not justified in sustaining the addition of ₹ 644750 for the alleged lower gross profit. The assessee submits that the said unjustified addition be kindly deleted (5) That on the facts in the circumstances of the case and in Jaw, the findings of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee had claimed closing stock of Soyabean Oil at ₹ 70,40,299/- for quantity of 1577.73 quintal at an average rate of ₹ 4462.29 per quintal. The assessee furnished the relevant details thereof. On verification of details, assessing officer observed that the assessee deals in Soyabean Oil that includes loose Soyabean Oil and packed Soyabean Oil with brand name Kriti from Kriti Industries India Ltd. Devas. However, no such separate details of Soyabean Oil were mentioned in the sales bills. The assessing officer was of the view that the assessee had understated the closing stock of Soyabean Oil by ₹ 1,40,643/-, therefore, he made addition. In this regard, further, assessing officer observed that the assessee made sales of Sarki Khalli without having stock in hand. Hence, he made an addition of ₹ 75,894/-. Further, the assessing officer made addition of ₹ 1,20,825/- by observing that in the quantitative details of Soyabean Oil account, the assessee has claimed loss of ₹ 26.85 quintals. He was asked to justify the loss, however no submission for explanation was offered, hence, the assessing officer made addition of ₹ 75,894/-. The asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such discrepancy existed. Books of accounts were also not required to be rejected. As regards the household expenses it was contended that sufficient drawings were shown by the assessee and his family members. The submissions made by the assessee reads as follows:- 1. Dealer of edible oils and grain merchant. 2. Ground no.1- Undervaluation of closing stock of soya bean oil ₹ 1,40,643/- a.AO page 2 para 4.2 - no difference in quantity as per AO and as per assessee, tax audit report PB 23 b.Rate per quintal (assessee) - average rate PB 70 c.Basis on which rate per quintal has been arrived at by Ld. AO is best known to him d.Uniform rate applied for entire purchases 3.Notice issued u/s 142(1) dated 12.03.2013 and fixed for hearing on 31.03.2013. Another notice was also issued on the same date fixing the date of hearing on 21.03.2013. [PB 73] 4.Assessment order passed on 26.03.2013 i.e. before the date of hearing. The order was passed without considering the submission of assessee which was filed in dak on 31.03.2013. 5. Ground no.2 - sale of sarki khalli without having any stock a.Posting error in the tally software ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter linked with 1 to 3 - assessing is objecting the merits of additions made on account of under valuation of closing stock of soya bean oil, sale without stock in hand and quantity loss of soya bean oil. 12.Ground no. 7 - CIT(A) after considering the documents under rule 46A sustained 13.Ground no. 8 - household expenses a.Assessee is aged about 73 years, betul is a small place b.Common mess and kitchen, joint family setup c.Married sons - income tax assessee, ITR on record d.Expenses of grandchildren incurred by their respective parents e.Expenses related only to assessee and his wife should be considered, ITR of wife also placed on record f.Burden of expenses of entire family cannot be shifted to one person. Family members have their income duly returned and meet their responsibilities. 6. Per contra Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued supporting the order of both the lower authorities. 7. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. Effectively the assessee had raised 8 grounds of appeals. Ground No.1, 2 3 are with regard to the addition made for the discrepancies found in the books o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ook page 39. Thus in our considered view this is not a discrepancy and no addition was called for at ₹ 75,894/- on account of sales without stock in hand. 12. As regards Ground No.3 relating to the addition of ₹ 1,20,825/- on account of quantity loss of soyabean oil (inadvertently mentioned as 1,02,825/- in grounds of appeal), we find that in the quantitative details the assessee has claimed loss of 26.85 quintal. Ld. A.O made addition for ₹ 1,20,825/- for the alleged loss of 26.85 quintal for the reason that the assessee had not given necessary reply. However on perusal of the Audit Report we find that this loss was very well reported in the Tax Audit Report which is placed at page-23 of the paper book at Annexure- III to the Audit Report. The details shows that the assessee had opening stock of soyabean oil at 796.8 quintal and purchase during the year is 49946.96 quintal and sale during the year is 49139.25 quintal. The loss of soyabean oil is merely 0.05% of the total soyabean oil sold during the year which is in consonance with the business activity consistently carried out by the assessee. In these given facts no addition was called for the quantity los ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
