TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Decision on Income, Profits, and Deductions</h1> <h3>Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Cent. Cir. 1 (4) Ahmedabad. Versus Mardia Copper Extrusion Pvt. Ltd.</h3> The Tribunal partially upheld the CIT(A)'s decision regarding unrecorded production and profits for the pre-search period, adding Rs. 19,39,418 as ... - Issues Involved:1. Unrecorded production and profits for the pre-search period.2. Unrecorded production and profits for the post-search period.3. Bogus purchases.4. Loss on sale of brass billets.5. Loss on same-day transactions.6. Deduction under Sections 80HH and 80I.7. Sale of scrap.Detailed Analysis:1. Unrecorded Production and Profits for the Pre-Search Period:- Facts: There was a search under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act on 23-1-1992. The AO discovered discrepancies between the production figures in the chemical analysis report and the books of account, indicating unrecorded production of 391.3 MTs.- AO's Calculation: The AO computed the undisclosed profit on unrecorded production at Rs. 1,36,23,570/- and after deducting Rs. 96.00 lakhs disclosed during the search, added Rs. 40,23,570/- as undisclosed income.- CIT(A)'s Decision: The CIT(A) deleted the addition on grounds such as lack of evidence of unrecorded sales, incorrect assumptions by the AO, and the absence of unaccounted purchases.- Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal partially upheld the CIT(A)'s decision but sustained an addition of Rs. 19,39,418/- based on the average sale price and profit calculations.2. Unrecorded Production and Profits for the Post-Search Period:- Facts: The AO estimated unrecorded production for the post-search period based on the average monthly production figures derived from seized material.- AO's Calculation: The AO added Rs. 68,11,785/- for the post-search period.- CIT(A)'s Decision: The CIT(A) deleted the addition due to lack of evidence for the post-search period.- Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal sustained an addition of Rs. 28,84,854/- for the months of April and May 1991 but deleted the addition for February and March 1992.3. Bogus Purchases:- Facts: The AO disallowed Rs. 51,08,219/- for purchases from Shreyas Metachem Pvt. Ltd., based on discrepancies in transportation records and statements from the transporter.- CIT(A)'s Decision: The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance, accepting the genuineness of the purchases and suggesting that the goods might have been transported by another transporter.- Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal reversed the CIT(A)'s decision, restoring the disallowance of Rs. 51,08,219/-, citing the transporter's credible statement and the circuitous nature of transactions.4. Loss on Sale of Brass Billets:- Facts: The AO disallowed a loss of Rs. 33,71,188/- on the sale of brass billets, questioning the business rationale behind converting brass tubes into billets and selling them at a loss.- CIT(A)'s Decision: The CIT(A) allowed a loss of Rs. 28,27,448/- based on a revised purchase price but sustained a disallowance of Rs. 5,43,748/-.- Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal allowed the entire loss of Rs. 33,71,188/-, finding no evidence of inflated purchase prices or suppressed sale prices.5. Loss on Same-Day Transactions:- Facts: The AO disallowed a loss of Rs. 96,581/- on same-day transactions of brass rods, suspecting manipulation.- CIT(A)'s Decision: The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance, finding no evidence of inflated purchase prices or suppressed sale prices.- Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the ground taken by the revenue.6. Deduction Under Sections 80HH and 80I:- Facts: The AO allowed deductions under Sections 80HH and 80I sequentially rather than simultaneously.- CIT(A)'s Decision: The CIT(A) allowed simultaneous deductions from the gross total income.- Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, following the Supreme Court judgments in JCIT Vs. Mandideep Engg. and PKG. Ind. P. Ltd. and CIT Vs. Amod Stamping.7. Sale of Scrap:- Facts: The AO added Rs. 5,39,580/- to the income, suspecting that the sale of dross was not properly accounted for.- CIT(A)'s Decision: The CIT(A) allowed the deduction, recognizing the sale as a genuine business loss.- Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal affirmed the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the ground taken by the revenue.Conclusion:- Department's Appeal: Partly allowed.- Assessee's Appeal: Allowed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
