Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful)

TaxTMI AI Drafter workflow from input facts to final legal draft Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Try Now
×

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
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2017 (12) TMI 1329

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ncies in stock and other deficiencies found at the time of survey. 4. That Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was not justified in not deleting addition of Rs. 5,27,503/- which was not based on facts & not supported by documentary evidence. 5. That Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has not looked into facts of the case and has never called for the statement recorded by the assessee which is already with deptt. 6. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) contention about the valuation of closing stock is not correct & not based as facts as the closing stock is always to be valued at cost and not selling price. 7. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax is not correct in saying that no objections were raised while framing the valuation of damaged stocks and consumables. 8. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has not appreciated the fact that the addition of Rs. 5,27,503/- represents cut pieces of finished goods, damaged stock and consumable stock which have been valued at selling price, but actually don't have any value." 3. At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted that the payments amounting to Rs. 64,726/- were made on 26.04.2008,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the stock statement of finished goods placed at P.B. page 39. The Ld. AR submitted that the stock as on 31.03.2009 as per the statement at page 39 has been accepted by the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings. Therefore while finalizing the assessment, the Assessing Officer was bound to take these rates for the purpose of arriving at the difference in stock. The Ld. submitted that similarly the plys of 12mm and 9mm has been valued by the survey team at Rs. 135 per sq. mm. whereas its price as per the stock statement was from Rs. 70 to 95. The Ld. AR further submitted that stock of finished goods placed at P.B. page 25 included damaged and cut pieces which was not saleable and its valuation was not taken into account in the opening stock as well as in the closing stock. Our attention was invited to P.B. 1 and 2 where copy of letter written to Assessing Officer explaining the difference in valuation of stock was placed. In view of the above, it was argued that if the correct calculation based upon purchase prices as per the stock statement as on 31.03.2009 after exclusion of damaged/obsolete stock is made, there will not be any difference in the valuation of stock. 4....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....der these circumstances it can safely be said that such cash payments were made under exceptional and unavoidable circumstances. In view of the disturbed conditions due to terrorism no one would like to keep cash with himself and therefore it is prudent on the part of any person to hand over the cash to supplier instead of keeping with himself. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh Vs. ITO 191 ITR 667 while dealing with the violation of provisions of section 40A(3) has held as under: "In our opinion, there is little merit in this contention. Sec. 40A(3) must not be read in isolation or to the exclusion of r. 6DD. The section must be read along with the rule. If read together, it will be clear that the provisions are not intended to restrict the business activities. There is no restriction on the assessee in his trading activities. Sec. 40A(3) only empowers the Assessing Officer to disallow the deduction claimed as expenditure in respect of which payment is not made by crossed cheque or crossed bank draft. The payment by crossed cheque or crossed bank draft is insisted on to enable the assessing authority to ascertain whether the payment was....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ly on the larger public interest element embedded in Section 40A and the underlying principle, at the same time, the Court also notes that the proviso seeks to relieve to a certain extent, the measure of hardship which might be imposed upon small businesses and professionals who are engaged in activities and are dependent entirely on timely cash flow. It is in such cases that Rule 6DD - which was formulated as a proviso to Section 40A (3) - steps in to aid such assessees and concerns. In this context, the statutory mandate in Section 6DD (k), at least in the circumstances of the case, has to be so construed as to mean that bur for the cash payment, the assessee would have been deprived the benefit of supplies itself. This Court clarifies that the interpretation of the expression "who is required to make payment in cash" having regard to the circumstances of the case is fact dependent, at least in the present case. The consequence of instances of payment through account payee cheques in small business which are dependent on such supplies would be to completely stifle, if not stop, the business activities. It is in that sense that the expression "required" would have to be construed.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... established, the requirement of Rule 6DD(i) must be deemed to have been satisfied. Paragraph 5 of the Circular reads as under [1977] 108 ITR (St.) 8, 9: 5. It can be said that it would, generally, satisfy the requirements of Rule 6DD(j), if a letter to the above effect is produced in respect of each transaction falling within the categories listed above from the seller giving full particulars of his address, sales tax number/permanent account number, if any, for the purposes of proper identification to enable the Income-tax Officer to satisfy himself about the genuineness of the transaction. The Income-tax Officer will, however, record his satisfaction before allowing the benefit of Rule 6DD(j). 18. It appears that fulfillment of the conditions of paragraph 5 of the circular has clearly escaped the attention of the Tribunal. The circular clearly indicates that ordinarily where the Income-tax Officer is satisfied about the genuineness of the transaction and payment and identification of the cash payment is established, the Income-tax Officer shall record his satisfaction about the fulfillment of the conditions for allowing the benefit of Rule 6DD(j). Apparently, S....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....arc intended to regulate the business transactions and to prevent the use of unaccounted money or reduce the chances to use black money for business transactions. [See: Miidiam Oil Company v. ITO [(1973) 92 ITR 519 (API1 ]. If the payment is made by a crossed cheque drawn on a bank or a crossed bank draft then it will be easier to ascertain, when deduction is claimed, whether the payment was genuine and whether it was out of the income from disclosed sources. In interpreting a taxing statute the court cannot be oblivious of the proliferation of black money which is under circulation in our country. Any restraint intended to curb the chances and opportunities to use or create black money should not be regarded as curtailing the freedom of trade or business." 9. At the cost of repetition, the Tribunal has not disbelieved the transactions or the genuineness thereof. Nor has it disbelieved the fact of payments having been made. More important, the reasons furnished by the appellant for having made the cash payments, which we have already adverted to, have not been disbelieved. In our view, assuming these reasons to be correct, they clearly make out a case of business expedienc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lained the total difference in respect of various sizes and the authorities below should have considered the same. We further find that the closing stock found at the time of survey included damaged/cut pieces and obsolete stock. This fact is verifiable from the inventory of stock itself placed at P.B. page 25 where the obsolete stocks/damaged stocks falling in the category of 4mm/3mm, 12mm/9mm and 18mm has been mentioned by adding separately on lump sum basis the quantity of 2000 sq. ft., 500 sq. ft., 1000 sq. ft. and 500 sq. ft. under various categories. The assessee had explained these facts vide letter addressed to Assessing Officer placed at P.B. page 1 to 3. The Assessing Officer in his order has noted down these contentions. The Assessing Officer has also noted down the contentions of assessee that there was difference in valuation of stock as the same has to be valued on cost price basis but still he did not verify the claim of assessee and made the additions. In this respect the contentions of assessee as noted by Assessing Officer are quite relevant which for the sake of completeness are reproduced below: "(C). The valuation of ply, board, finished stock for the ....