TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (2) TMI 694
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d circumstances of the Appellant's case. 2. The NFAC has grossly erred in upholding the addition made u/s 69B of the Act amounting to Rs.3,02,400/- under the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The NFAC has gross erred in upholding the addition without appreciating the fact that the excess gold and silver jewellery stock found at the business premises belongs to the personal effects of the appellant under the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. The NFAC has grossly erred in upholding the addition without giving credit to the personal belongings of the jewellery to the appellant under the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Without prejudice to the above, the NFAC has grossly erred in uphol....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e appeal and craves to urge such other grounds as may be deemed necessary during the time of appellate proceedings." 2. At the time of hearing, the assessee has not pressed ground Nos.4 to 6. Accordingly, these grounds are dismissed as not pressed. 3. Facts of the case are that the assessee being aggrieved by the order of assessment passed under section 143[3] of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'] by the learned Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Bellary, dated 01/03/2021 filed this appeal for the redressal of the grievances voiced in the grounds of appeal. The precise and relevant facts for appreciation of the grievances of the assessee are mentioned hereunder:- 3.1 The assessee is an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Act. 3.5 Aggrieved by the order of the learned Assessing Officer, the assessee filed this statutory appeal before this Tribunal under the provisions of section 253 of the Act. The brief facts in support of the case of the assessee are brought out in the following paragraphs. The issues involved in this appeal is as follows: a) whether Excess stock found in the business premises of the assessee during Survey amounting to Rs. 3,02,400/-is Business Income or Income from other sources u/s. 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act? [1] The learned assessing officer without appreciating the submissions of the assessee, completed the Assessment on the premise that the assessee has not offered any acceptable and cogent explanation regardin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ich are not recorded in the Books of Account, if any, maintained by the assessee for any source of income; and [b]The Assessee offers no or satisfactory explanation about the nature and source of acquisition of the said money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article. [4] The assessee further submitted that she has satisfactorily explained about the nature and source of the acquisition of the said stock. It is also relevant to note that the provision contains the language 'may' be deemed to be the income of the assessee and not the word 'shall'. Thus, the invoking of section 69A of the Act is not applicable. [5] The assessee relied on the decisions of the Supreme Court, High Courts and Tribunals which were squar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has decided the issue as follows: "10. We heard the rival submissions and relied on the documents available in the records. In the argument, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee mentioned that the assessee is a trader and turnover during this FY 2017-18 was an amount of Rs. 10,03,840/- and assessee was not liable for the tax audit u/s. 44AB of the Act. But in business, the excess stock was declared in the trading account and the tax was paid on the difference of stock under normal rate. The Ld. Counsel relied on the order of the Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Bangalore in case of Ragavs Diagnostic & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT in ITA No. 423/Bang/2022 by order dated 09.09.2022. It was held as follows: - "13....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se under consideration. Therefore, we are of the view that the additional income offered cannot be taxed u/s. 115BBE and the impugned addition is hereby deleted. Accordingly the assessee is allowed to set off the current year loss against the additional income offered to tax as business income." 11. The Ld. Counsel further relied on the order of ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench in case of M/s. Chokshi Hiralal Maganlal vs. DCIT in ITA No. 3281/Ahd/2009 by order dated 05.08.2011. The relevant para is extracted as below:- "14. To conclude, sum of Rs.8.10,011/- being difference in stock is represented by undeclared business income. It does not have a separate physical identity. It is to be only taxed under the head 'business'. Ot....