2022 (8) TMI 206

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....margin considered as income in respect of unaccounted sales being a sum of Rs.1,69,281/- on the facts and circumstances of the case and consequently passed a perverse order? 2. Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) by giving a perverse finding that the difference between the unaccounted sales and unaccounted purchases would include an amount of Rs.1,69,289/- towards suppressed profits from the unaccounted transactions and the balance amount of Rs.23,94,751/- represents the undisclosed investment in unaccounted purchases on the facts and circumstances of the case?   3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in confirming a sum of Rs.23,94....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on of gross profit. After the remand, the CIT(A) observed that the net effect was the same and there was no infirmity in the Assessment order and accordingly dismissed the appeal. Assessee challenged the same in ITA No.338/Bang/2014. The ITAT concurred with the findings of CIT(A) that the difference between unaccounted sales and purchases would include 1% profit from the unaccounted transactions and the balance amount represents the undisclosed investment in unaccounted purchases; and accordingly dismissed the appeal. 4. Shri. Chandra Sekhar submitted that after ITAT remanded the matter, the CIT(A) vide order dated June 27, 2013, has dismissed the appeal with a cryptic order without assigning any reasons. The said order was challenged be....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....,64,108 Closing Stock 74,52,100 50,57,363 Gross Profit 20,98,078 22,67,376       Total 21,72,61,544 23,17,94,947 Total 21,72,61,544 23,17,94,947 8. On further appeal, ITAT has held in para 11.5.6 as follows: "11.5.6 The learned CIT (Appeals) in the impugned order dt.27.6.2013 had taken the profit element on the unaccounted sales at Rs.1,69,281 (i.e. at 1% of unaccounted sales of Rs.1,69,28,140) and considered the balance amount of the difference as unexplained investment and adjusted the same in the closing stock. In our view, this approach of the learned CIT (Appeals) cannot be faulted as the assessee itself has adjusted the closing stock in the re-cast accounts. In th....