Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal allows appeal, discrepancies in stock details deemed errors, assessee's evidence accepted</h1> <h3>M/s. Reckitt Piramal Pvt. Ltd. Versus Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-8 (3), MUMBAI</h3> The Tribunal found that discrepancies in stock details were due to errors in the conversion factor and total number of boxes accounted for. The Tribunal ... Addition made on account of difference in quantitative details - Revision u/s 263 - discrepancy in stock of Dettol soap fresh - AO explained the conversion factor as erroneously applied by assessee - difference in stock i.e., unaccounted purchased worked out to ₹ 1737.45 MT which remained unexplained - Held that:- It is clear that the assessee has applied the conversion factor of Dettol soap as is marketed in bars weighing 75 gms and 150 gms whereas Dettol liquid soap is marketed in 250 ml. bottles/dispensers. Similarly, Dettol anticipated liquid is marketed in 100 ml. and 500 ml bottles and Dettol Shaving creams in 70 gms tubes. The dispute is restricted to the conversion factor applicable in respect of Dettol soap fresh of 75 gms packing and assessee has file quantitative information in this regard and it proves that the assessee is following the system of computing the weight of its item by multiplying the total no. of boxes with an appropriate multiplier. Similarly, once the multiplier per box is arrived at, the same is applied to the total no. of boxes and the total volume soap cakes, sold in grams is arrived at. The assessee has made a mistake while preparing the quantitative information for the relevant assessment year, as the concerned official of the assessee instead of applying the weight of Dettol soap fresh cake as 75 gms, applied as 250 gms (this is actually Dettol liquid soap sold in 250 ml). Now, the assessee has filed the complete data as discussed above and Revenue / learned CIT DR, could not controvert the above discussed facts before us. Accordingly, we are of the view that the difference in stock to the extent of 1737.45 mt in the stock of Dettol is entirely due to above errors, which has been properly explained with the re-conciliations supported by the book entries. Hence, we find no difference in the stock as above explained. Hence, we delete the addition and allow this appeal of the assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues Involved:1. Confirmation of addition made by the AO on account of differences in quantitative details.2. Justification of the conversion factor applied for Dettol Soap Fresh.3. Error in the total number of boxes accounted for.4. Reconciliation of discrepancies in stock details.Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:1. Confirmation of Addition by AO:The assessee challenged the confirmation of an arbitrary addition of Rs. 19,55,63,259/- made by the AO due to alleged discrepancies in the quantitative details of stock. The CIT(A) upheld this addition without considering the detailed submissions made by the assessee, leading to the present appeal.2. Justification of Conversion Factor:The primary dispute revolved around the conversion factor applied to Dettol Soap Fresh. The assessee used an erroneous conversion factor of 250 grams per cake instead of the correct 75 grams per cake. This error was attributed to a mix-up with the conversion factor for Dettol Liquid Soap, which is sold in 250 ml bottles. The Hon'ble Supreme Court directed the ITAT to re-examine this aspect, leading to the remand of the case to the AO for verification.3. Error in Total Number of Boxes:The assessee also admitted to an error in the total number of boxes accounted for. Instead of the correct figure of 49,681 boxes, the total was mistakenly taken as 52,404 boxes due to an arithmetical error. This contributed to the discrepancy in the stock details.4. Reconciliation of Discrepancies:The AO noted that the assessee's stock of Dettol Soap Fresh was shown as 766.73 MT, whereas the correct figure should have been negative 970.72 MT due to the erroneous conversion factor and the incorrect number of boxes. The assessee provided detailed reconciliations, demonstrating that the discrepancy was due to these errors and not due to any unaccounted purchases. The assessee argued that the difference in stock was entirely due to the erroneous application of the conversion factor and the error in the number of boxes, which had no impact on the value of closing stock or business profit.Final Judgment:The Tribunal found that the discrepancy of 1737.45 MT in the stock of Dettol Soap Fresh was due to the erroneous conversion factor and the incorrect number of boxes accounted for. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had provided sufficient evidence and reconciliations to support its claim. The Revenue could not controvert these facts. Consequently, the Tribunal deleted the addition of Rs. 19,55,63,259/- and allowed the appeal of the assessee.Order:The appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the addition made by the AO was deleted. The judgment was pronounced in the open court on 12th Dec, 2018.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found