2022 (11) TMI 822

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Kolkata. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeals for Assessment Year 2013-14:- 1. That the addition made by the ld. AO of Rs. 10,01,000/as undisclosed sale and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(Appeal) is bad in law as well as in fact. 2. That the ld. AO as well as the ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as facts in considering scrap sale of 10,01,000/as undisclosed sale in spite of the same being part of total sale which is evident from the audited books of account as well as the VAT returns and other relevant documents. 3. That the ld. AO as well as the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law in imposing tax twice on a single transaction. 4. The appellant prays before your Honour to raise new point of the time of hearing, if necessary. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(A). However, subsequently the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. M/s. Subarna Rice Mill in ITA No. 196 of 2015 dt. 20-06-2018 held that if undisclosed purchase (stock) are discovered, it is only the profit embedded in the transaction, which can be added to the total income. In view of this judgment, it was prayed that the additions should not be made for the entire amount of undisclosed stock and should be restricted to the extent of gross profit. 7. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued supporting the orders of both the lower authorities. 8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material placed on record before us. 9. As regard to ground nos. 1 to 3 raised by the assessee....