AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (1) TMI 1370
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng proposed substantial questions. "(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the ITAT is justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,72,78,269/-made by the AO on the basis of the impounded document found during the survey proceedings ignoring that the primary onus to rebut the contents of the said document is on the assessee and the assessee has failed to discharge the onus? (2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the ITAT is justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 14,88,789/-made by the AO on account of the difference in stock, without appreciating that the said addition was made on the basis of physical stock inventory taken on the date of survey and the stocks as per t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....come return of Rs. 73,55,530/-and has refused to Rs. 87,10,030/-. While passing the assessment order the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 2,72,78,269/-as undisclosed net profit. The Assessing Officer also made the addition of Rs. 14,83,789/-on account of difference in stock. [2.2] Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned Assessing Officer in making the addition of Rs. 2,72,78,269/-as undisclosed net profit and in making addition of Rs. 14,83,789/-on account of difference in stock, the assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(A). That the learned CIT(A) allowed the said appeal partly by deleting the addition of Rs. 2,72,78,269/-made by the Assessing Officer on the basis of the impounded docume....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... [4.1] Now, so far as the question with respect to the addition of Rs. 2,72,78,269/-made by the learned Assessing Officer as undisclosed net profit is concerned, the learned Assessing Officer has discussed the same in para 10A. The relevant discussion by the learned CIT(A) while deleting the aforesaid addition is in para 7 and more particularly in para 7.9. Para 7.9 of the order passed by the learned CIT(A) reads as under: "7.9 I have carefully considered the findings of the AO and the detailed submissions made by the ld. AR. The fact is that the AO relied on a provisional P&L A/c. for a part of the year to make such huge addition. He has not brought any materials/evidence on record why the contention of the appellant was not acceptable....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the contention of the appellant was not acceptable. He has accepted the year ending P&L a/c and not doubted any expenditures whatsoever claimed by the assessee, but made such huge addition. It does not appeal to the common sense about such huge net profit at 46.43/% especially for the type of assessee's business. The Assessing Officer should have drawn the P&L a/c. as on the survey date after considering all income and expenditures. In this case no such attempt was made by the Assessing Officer before making such addition. Therefore, looking to the nature of the business of the assessee, which is spread over different geographical area, it requires time to record accounting entries and the assessee could not record all the transactions as o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e addition of Rs. 2,72,78,269/-as undisclosed net profit except one piece of paper / provisional P&L account which was explained by the assessee. Under the circumstances, present Tax Appeal deserves to be dismissed qua proposed question No.(1). [5.0] Now, so far as the question No.(2) is concerned, the same is with respect to addition made by the learned Assessing Officer on account of difference in stock. The learned Assessing Officer made the addition of Rs. 14,83,789/-on account of difference in stock which came to be restricted to Rs. 63,597/-by the learned CIT(A) and the learned Tribunal. Considering the material on record it appears that the stock valued by the survey team was of Rs. 22,38,770/-and the learned Assessing Officer consi....