TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (2) TMI 545
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....read with section 263 of the Act on 28.3.2013. The assessee challenged the assessment order so passed by filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) and the same was allowed in part. Aggrieved by the order passed by the learned CIT(A), both the parties have filed appeal before us. In addition to the above, the assessee has also filed an appeal challenging the revision order passed u/s. 263 of the Act. All these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order, for the sake of convenience. 3. The appeal filed by the assessee challenging the revision order passed u/s 263 of the Act is barred by limitation by 637 days. The only reason submitted by the assessee for delay is that the assessee's erstwhile tax consultant did not advice on filing the appeal and only when a new legal consultant was pointed, he advised the assessee to file appeal challenging the revision order. The above said reason is not convincing to us and accordingly we decline to condone the delay. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 1252/Mum/2014 is dismissed in limine. 4. In the appeal filed by the assessee challenging the order passed by the learned CIT(A), the assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Multiple of weight of 18 kt gold (in gms) to weight of diamonds (in cts) 10.21 times 5.46 times 23.59 times 17.48 times 7.24 times 6. The Assessing Officer noticed that the ratio of stones to gold worked out to 23.59 times in case of manufactured goods and accordingly took the view that the same cannot be accepted. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer took the view that the assessee has manipulated the details to suit its convenience. The Assessing Officer particularly referred to following statement relating to sales furnished by the assessee: Particulars Gross weight of gold (in gms) Net weight of gold (in gms) Diamond (in carats) Color stone (in carats) Net amount (in Rs.) Gross amount (in Rs.) Sale to various parties 22390.89 19648.29 3007.54 10607.44 11.93 crores 12.03 crores Issue to karigar/breaking/remaking/ melting/setting 41509.59 40950.66 458.39 2287.71 Total 63900.47 60598.95 3465.93 12895.15 11.93 crores 12.03 crores The Assessing Officer noticed that the quantity of 40950.66 grams of gold issued to the Karigars has not bee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....disclosed purchases. The learned CIT(A), however, declined to admit the additional evidence with regard to legal expenses and accordingly confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved by the order passed by the learned CIT(A), both the parties have filed the appeal challenging the order passed by the learned CIT(A) on the issues decided against each of them. 10. We shall first take up the appeal filed by the assessee. As stated earlier, the AO disallowed legal and professional fee only for want of certain evidences. We notice that the assessee filed those evidences before Ld CIT(A), but the first appellate authority declined to admit them. We notice that the AO had asked for IT return copy and financial statements of M/s Quardant Communication, to whom the assessee had paid the legal and professional fee. It is quite natural that it may take some time, since the assessee herein had to obtain those details from the above said party. Hence, in the interest of natural justice, we are of the view that the additional evidences should be admitted and this issue needs to be re-examined. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) on this issue and restore ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....concerned with the quantity of 40950.66 grams of gold shown as issued to "Karigars/breaking etc", i.e., the assessee has included the above said quantity in the "Sales" with zero value. In our view, the quantification of Rs. 2.55 crores discussed in the second paragraph is the methodology adopted by the AO to compute the addition. 12. Hence, in our view, what is required to be explained by the assessee is the details relating to 40950.66 gms of gold issued to Karigars etc, which was shown at Zero value. In the quantity details relating to finished goods, the sales quantity is shown at 60598.95 grams, which consist of following items:- Sales made to various parties 19648.29 gms Issued to Karigars etc. 40950.66 gms 60598.95 gms Before Ld CIT(A), the assessee has offered following explanations:- "The appellant submits that the gold, diamonds and colour stones issued to Karigars/breaking/remaking/melting/setting included in sales with no value which have received back as manufactured gold jewellery and diamond studded jewellery with no value. It is the normal practice followed by the appellant of showing issues to Karigars for processin....