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 Adjusts Disallowances and Valuations, Upholds CIT(A) Decisions</h1> <h3>The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax Versus M/s. R. Vipul & Co.</h3> The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax Versus M/s. R. Vipul & Co. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Disallowance of labour charges.2. Under-valuation of closing stock of polished diamonds.3. Under-valuation of closing stock of rough diamonds.4. Deduction under Section 80HHC of the IT Act on export realization during the extended period.5. Validity of assessment under Section 144 r.w.s. 145(3) of the IT Act.Detailed Analysis:1. Disallowance of Labour Charges:The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s decision to restrict the disallowance of Rs. 34,21,248/- to Rs. 5,00,000/- and Rs. 2,00,000/- respectively. The AO noted a decline in the GP rate and found discrepancies in the books of accounts, including unverified labour expenses and unpaid labour charges. The CIT(A) restricted the disallowance, citing lack of adverse findings and the normal course of business. However, the Tribunal, referencing a similar case (M/s. M. Kantilal Exports), decided to allow labour charges at Rs. 270 per carat instead of Rs. 300, directing the AO to re-compute the disallowance accordingly.2. Under-Valuation of Closing Stock of Polished Diamonds:The AO added Rs. 1,02,53,498/- due to under-valuation, comparing the average sale price of March 2002 with the whole year's average. The CIT(A) deleted the addition, emphasizing consistent valuation methods and the need to adjust both opening and closing stocks uniformly. The Tribunal, disagreeing with the CIT(A), referred to a similar case (M/s. Kantilal Exports) and directed the AO to re-calculate the valuation by averaging the figures, thereby partly allowing the Revenue's ground.3. Under-Valuation of Closing Stock of Rough Diamonds:The AO added Rs. 1,10,00,414/- for under-valuation of rough diamonds, using the average rate of the last three months' purchases. The CIT(A) deleted the addition, citing documentary evidence and the revenue-neutral nature of the adjustment. The Tribunal, referencing M/s. Kantilal Exports, adopted an average rate for re-computation, partly allowing the Revenue's ground.4. Deduction under Section 80HHC of the IT Act on Export Realization During the Extended Period:The AO disallowed the deduction due to lack of RBI approval for extended realization. The CIT(A), however, found that requisite approvals were obtained and directed the AO to allow the deduction. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the Revenue's grounds.5. Validity of Assessment under Section 144 r.w.s. 145(3) of the IT Act:The assessee challenged the invocation of Section 145(3) due to incomplete books of accounts. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's action, citing unverifiable labour payments and lack of production records. The Tribunal, referencing a similar case (M/s. Kantilal Exports), dismissed the assessee's ground, affirming the rejection of books of accounts.Conclusion:Both the Revenue's and the assessee's appeals were partly allowed, with the Tribunal directing re-computation of disallowances and valuations based on average rates and consistent methodologies, while upholding the CIT(A)'s decisions on certain grounds.
TaxTMI 