2012 (11) TMI 795 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal allows appeal on valuation issues, directs fresh adjudication for lack of supporting details

M/s Darrk Diamonds Versus The Income-tax Officer, Ward-9(1), Surat

M/s Darrk Diamonds Versus The Income-tax Officer, Ward-9(1), Surat - TMI Issues Involved:1. Rejection of Book Result2. Addition to valuation of closing stock of rough diamonds3. Miscellaneous issues regarding interest charged under sections 234A and 234B of the Income-tax ActIssue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Rejection of Book Result:The appellant argued that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the rejection of the Book Result despite maintaining complete quantitative details of the diamonds. The appellant cited the Ahmedabad Tribunal's judgment in the case of B. Suresh Kumar, which was not considered by the Commissioner. The appellant contended that the book result should have been accepted.2. Addition to Valuation of Closing Stock of Rough Diamonds:The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) sustained an addition of Rs. 52,32,680 to the valuation of the closing stock of rough diamonds. The appellant maintained that the valuation was done according to accepted Accounting Principles and a consistently adopted method. The appellant argued that the addition distorted the income and was based on the incorrect premise that qualitative accounts of diamonds were not maintained. The appellant further clarified the difference between the valuation of rough diamonds and rejected rough diamonds, emphasizing that rejected diamonds have negligible value and should not significantly impact the overall valuation.3. Miscellaneous Issues:The appellant contended that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) should have deleted the interest charged under sections 234A and 234B of the Income-tax Act.Tribunal's Observations and Decision:Rejection of Book Result:The Tribunal noted that the assessing officer observed defects in the valuation of closing stock and requested detailed information, which the appellant failed to provide adequately. The assessing officer found it impossible to identify lot-wise goods movement from the books of accounts. Consequently, the assessing officer issued a show cause notice, questioning the valuation method used by the appellant.Addition to Valuation of Closing Stock of Rough Diamonds:The Tribunal observed that the assessing officer did not find merit in the appellant's contention regarding the valuation method. The appellant's method of averaging the purchase prices and the value of the opening stock was not justified due to the lack of qualitative details and documentary evidence for rejected diamonds. The assessing officer adopted a scientific method, correlating the entries of issue with their respective sources (opening stock or purchase) and valuing the closing stock at Rs. 740 per carat instead of Rs. 479.24 shown in the books. The Tribunal found the assessing officer's approach fair, reasonable, and scientific.Miscellaneous Issues:The Tribunal did not specifically address the issues regarding interest charged under sections 234A and 234B.Conclusion:The Tribunal acknowledged that the appellant was prevented from filing the requisite details due to the short notice period and that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) did not properly appreciate the details submitted. Therefore, the Tribunal deemed it proper to restore the matter to the file of the assessing officer for fresh adjudication in light of the details and submissions made by the appellant. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.