TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (10) TMI 222
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....referred to Assessing Officer(AO)), under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, `the Act`) dated 25/03/2013. 2. The brief background of the case is that the assessee is a private limited company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act and is inter-alia, engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of Poultry feeds. The assessee has also shown to have earned income from contractual work of manufacturing and produce of poultry feed of other person as per goods and order placed by them (termed as processing charges). The assessee also reported income from truck plying, subsidy received and interest on FDR. The assessee filed its return of income electronically on 24.09.2010 declaring a net total income of R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r grounds have not been pressed. Ground Nos. 2 and 3 reflect a solitary grievance of the assessee which is against the action of the Assessing Officer in holding that the assessee has unaccounted stock Rs. 5,63,608/- and claimed depreciation at Rs. 1,11,319/- wrongly. 4. Ground No. 2:Addition on account of unaccounted Stock Rs. 5,63,608/- The facts of this issue are stated in brief.In this case, a survey U/s 133A of the I.T. Act, 1961 was conducted on 17.03.2010 at the two Factory premises of the assessee company at Durgapur, P.O.-Bhupalpur, Dist- Uttar Dinajpur and at the office premise. During the course of survey operation u/s 133A of the I.T. Act,1961, the physical verification of stock was taken under the assistance of the assessee`....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../s Qualix and M/s Pabittra Feeds, but the assessee failed to quantify the details and value of such stock belongs to other parties. Later on 19.03.2010, the assessee did not raise the same point but only disclosed a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/- (iv). On 19.03.2010, when the assessee was in possession of all books of account as inventorised by survey team never mentioned that the purchase considered by survey team was wrong to take purchase figure at Rs. 4,54,79,563/- the said figure would have to be Rs. 4,60,73,602/- (v) The assessee after three years came with an reconciliation that as per entries dated 16.03.2010, the figure was Rs. 4,60,73,602/-, so the manipulation of books can not be ruled out. (vi) Theassessee failed to explain the other po....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that survey was conducted on 17.03.2010 whereas the stock register was maintained by the assessee up to 12.03.2010. The Assessing Officer did not make the reconciliation for 5 days entries in stock register to judge the discrepancies, therefore, it is a guess work done by the Assessing Officer. The Ld. AR for the assessee argued that no any defect in books of accounts was pointed out by the AO and books of accounts were not rejected by AO. Even statement recorded during the survey U/s 133A(3)(iii) has no evidentiary value and addition can not be made on the sole basis of that statement. Instruction No. 286/2/2003 (Inv) dt. 10.03.2003, issued by CBDT also says that no addition can be made merely on the basis of statement of the assessee. Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f his assessment order observed that: "The assessee is owner of a truck. On examination, it is found that in addition to giving the truck on hire the assessee might has also been using trucks for own business. The assessee has not been maintaining proper details about the trucks, percentage of its use for own business and use it for giving for hire. So, it is difficult on the part on the undersigned to calculate the actual net profit from the truck plying. On examination, it is found that the assessee has reported an income of Rs. 59,335/- from truck plying (net after expenses). As, the assessee is also using the truck for own business, so the assessee`s actual earning from truck is not reflected in the income from truck head." Assessing O....