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.
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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2022 (11) TMI 525 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        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

        Tribunal deletes Rs. 44,06,108/- addition to income for unexplained excess stock The Tribunal allowed the appeal, deleting the addition of Rs. 44,06,108/- made to the income of the assessee on account of unexplained excess stock. The ...
                          Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                              Tribunal deletes Rs. 44,06,108/- addition to income for unexplained excess stock

                              The Tribunal allowed the appeal, deleting the addition of Rs. 44,06,108/- made to the income of the assessee on account of unexplained excess stock. The Tribunal found that the Revenue's comparison of two un-comparable systems led to an erroneous calculation of excess stock.




                              Issues Involved:
                              1. Confirmation of addition of Rs. 44,06,108/- on account of alleged difference in stock found during the survey.

                              Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                              1. Confirmation of addition of Rs. 44,06,108/- on account of alleged difference in stock found during the survey:

                              The main grievance of the assessee is the confirmation of the addition of Rs. 44,06,108/- by the CIT(A) due to the alleged difference in stock found during the survey conducted under section 133A of the Income Tax Act on 11.12.2012. The assessee filed its return of income disclosing a total income of Rs. 85,22,230/- for the Assessment Year 2013-14. The survey team computed the physical stock available in the store using the ORIEL POS Software System and compared it with the stock figures maintained in Tally Software, finding a significant discrepancy.

                              The assessee contended that there was a casting mistake of Rs. 18,75,185/- in the physical stock valuation by the survey team. The assessee further rectified the casting mistakes to Rs. 21,14,900/-, arriving at a physical closing stock value of Rs. 4,25,28,255/-.

                              The assessee also explained that the inventory of stock in Tally ERP-9 was as on 04.12.2012, while the physical stock was taken on 11.12.2012. The reconciliation of stock as per Tally ERP as on 11.12.2012 showed a closing stock of Rs. 3,76,75,180/-, leading to a discrepancy of Rs. 44,06,108/- when compared to the physical stock.

                              The Revenue, however, did not accept the assessee's explanation, providing five reasons for the rejection:
                              (a) Uncertainty about which software (Tally ERP or ORIEL POS) was used for final accounts.
                              (b) The unexplained reason for maintaining stock in both Tally ERP and ORIEL POS.
                              (c) Discrepancy of Rs. 44,06,108/- still existing after updating Tally ERP.
                              (d) The question of why the stock as per Tally ERP was not correct if actual valuations were entered in it.
                              (e) Absence of mention in the audit report that the valuation of closing stock was done by ORIEL POS software.

                              The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A) did not bring any relief. The assessee argued that the Revenue compared two incomparable systems, leading to the erroneous calculation of excess stock. The assessee maintained that the ORIEL POS Software tracked purchases and sales with barcodes, providing cost-specific identifiable inventory items, while Tally Software was used for general accounting.

                              The Tribunal found that the Revenue erred in comparing two un-comparable systems (Tally Software and ORIEL POS Software). The assessee demonstrated through audited accounts that taxable income was computed based on ORIEL POS Software details. The Tribunal noted that for the Financial Year 2011-12, the closing stock as per audited accounts (ORIEL POS) was Rs. 3,39,87,692/-, while as per Tally Software, it was Rs. 2,33,48,269/-. The discrepancy was due to the use of different software systems for book stock and actual stock.

                              The Tribunal concluded that the excess stock was worked out by the Assessing Officer based on an erroneous mathematical exercise, not on account of particular items but due to valuation differences between two different software systems. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, deleting the addition of Rs. 44,06,108/- made to the income of the assessee on account of unexplained excess stock.

                              Conclusion:
                              The appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the addition of Rs. 44,06,108/- on account of unexplained excess stock was deleted. The Tribunal found that the Revenue's comparison of two un-comparable systems led to an erroneous calculation of excess stock.
                              Full Summary is available for active users!
                              Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                              Topics

                              ActsIncome Tax
                              No Records Found