TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (9) TMI 38
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of. Subsequent to recalling of the order dated 13.06.2022 as above, fresh order is passed in Tax Appeal No.263/2022 as under : 1. Revenue has preferred this tax appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (For short "the Act, 1961") for the assessment year 2008-2009 challenging the judgment and order dated 27.08.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Surat Bench, Surat (For short "the Tribunal"). 2. Following substantial questions of law are proposed by the Revenue : "(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT has erred in not appreciating the addition made by the AO on account of undisclosed profit and unaccounted investment in undervalued goods when Assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tified in dismissing the appeal of Revenue without considering the fact that the Assessee itself submitted for addition on account of unexplained investment basing upon the peak theory?" 3. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent-assessee company is engaged in the business of import of metalized polyester film/yarn and manufacturing of imitation Jari/Kasab and Badla. 4. The assessee company filed its return of income for the assessment year 2008-2009 on 30.08.2008 declaring total income at Rs. 13,50,531/-. The case of the assessee was taken for scrutiny assessment and the Assessing Officer vide order dated 29.10.2010 passed under section 143(3) of the Act, 1961 determined the total income of assessee at Rs. 24,30,282/- by making a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....basis of information from Customs Authorities and the statement of Shri Pragnesh Jariwala director of the assessee company, made before DRI. Further, the deponent has retracted from the said statement. Therefore, the addition made based on information from Customs Authorities, without making any independent enquiries is not tenable in law. Hence, the Ld. CIT (A) has rightly deleted the same. We, further, note that the Ld.CIT(A) has also supported his view by placing reliance in the case of Vinod Solanki (Civil Appeal No. 7407 of 2008] wherein the Honourable Supreme Court held that evidence brought on record by way of admission statement or confessional must be substantially corroborated by the other independent and cogent evidences. The H....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted investment and gross profit. In view of this, the Ground Nos. 1 and 2 of the appeal of the Revenue are therefore dismissed." 7. Learned advocate Ms. Raval for the appellant- Revenue submitted that the Tribunal failed to consider that the assessee has undervalued the imported goods during the year under consideration and the Assessing Officer has made the additions on the basis of the information received from DRI and therefore, the assessee was rightly held to have paid for the imported goods outside the books of accounts. It was further submitted that the Assessing Officer has rightly held that the assessee has carried on sales on cash over and above sums as disclosed in the books of accounts. It was submitted that the Tribunal failed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Assessing Officer also made addition of Gross Profit by taking such unaccounted purchase as sale made by the assessee in cash without making any independent inquiry. It was observed by both the authorities that the Assessing Officer has solely relied upon the information from the Customs authority and statement of Pragnesh Jariwala - Director of the assessee-company made before DRI which was retracted later on. 9. The Tribunal has also considered the fact of the appeal being allowed by the Custom, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Bench in case of assessee holding that the allegation of undervaluation of imported goods was not established and therefore, directed the Customs Authority to grant the refund of customs duty colle....