2012 (9) TMI 654 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal Partially Allows Appeal on Cash & Stock Discrepancies

The Tribunal remanded the matter to the AO to verify if the excess cash of Rs. 2,00,000 was already included in the disclosed income. The appeal was ... Addition on account of excess cash found in search u/s 132 - During Survey assessee made disclosure of Rs. 41 lacs comprising of excess cash of Rs 2 lac - In the profit and loss account the assessee had disclosed Rs. 41 lacs as “IT declared stock” and the same was offered for tax - AO had also made an addition on account of excess amount of cash of Rs. 2 lacs - Held that:- From the assessment order of the AO and the order of CIT(A) it is not clear as to whether the amount of Rs 41 lacs includes Rs 2 lac of excess cash found. In view of these facts, we are of the opinion that in the fairness of things and to meet the ends of justice this matter be remanded to the file of A.O for verification. Case remand back to AO. Addition on account of difference in stock found during survey u/s 132 - Assessee submit stock statement on the basis of purchases worked out on FIFO method inclusive of transportation and loading charges – AO made addition on basis of difference found in statement and stock shown in books of accounts – Held that:- As the discrepancy could not be reconciled and satisfactorily explained by assessee. The Assessee could not demonstrate before CIT(A) that the closing stock was without transportation charges and loading charges. The Ld. A.R. before us also could not demonstrate with any tangible evidence the correct working of stock. Therefore appeal decides in favour of revenue. Issues:1. Addition of excess cash found during survey2. Addition of stock difference3. Set off of disclosed incomeIssue 1: Addition of Excess Cash Found During SurveyThe appellant contested the addition of Rs. 2,00,000 as excess cash found during a survey, arguing that it was disclosed along with the income and should not be separately added. The AO found a discrepancy in the cash balance between the survey and the books of accounts, leading to the addition. The CIT(A) partially allowed the appeal, reducing the addition to Rs. 1,87,966 based on the difference found. The appellant further argued that the entire disclosed income included the excess cash, and hence, the separate addition was unjust. The Tribunal remanded the matter to the AO for verification to ascertain if the Rs. 2,00,000 was already included in the disclosed amount, emphasizing cooperation from the appellant for the verification process.Issue 2: Addition of Stock DifferenceRegarding the addition of Rs. 2,24,714 as stock difference, the AO added the amount due to a significant variance between the book stock and the FIFO method calculation during assessment. The CIT(A) upheld the addition, stating that the FIFO method was correct, including transportation and loading charges in stock valuation. The appellant argued that the stock statement submitted did not include these charges, and the valuation was based on the survey party's assessment. However, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, as the appellant failed to provide substantial evidence to refute the stock difference, resulting in the dismissal of this ground of appeal.Issue 3: Set Off of Disclosed IncomeThe appellant raised a general ground seeking the deletion of the disclosed income of Rs. 41 lakhs. This ground was not extensively argued and pressed, leading to its dismissal without detailed adjudication. Consequently, the Tribunal partly allowed the appeal concerning the excess cash addition but dismissed the appeal regarding the stock difference, maintaining the CIT(A)'s decision.