TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (1) TMI 604
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....earned Commissioner of Income-Tax [Appeals] is against Law and facts of the case. 2] That the Learned Commissioner [Appeals] has also erred in treating Rs. 1,42,67,032/- of excess Stock and Cash found in Survey u/s 133A as deemed income u/s 69-69A instead of treating the same as business income. Hence, findings of the Commissioner [Appeals] is against Law and facts of the case. 3] That the Learned Commissioner [Appeals] has erred in sustaining disallowance of Salary to Working Partners amounting to Rs. 57,26,914/- made by the Income-Tax Officer ignoring the fact that excess Stock and Cash found in Survey is business income. Hence, the disallowance Sustained of Rs. 57,26,914/- is liable to be deleted. 4] For these ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....CIT(A) the assessee filed appeal before this Tribunal. Submission of ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) : 3. The ld.AR filed a paper book. Ld.AR explained that there was a survey in the case of assessee on 13.11.2014. During the Survey, to buy peace and avoid litigation, assessee offered Rs. 1,42,67,032/- as additional business income for A.Y.2015-16, accordingly, assessee filed return of income for A.Y.2015-16 on 24.09.2015. Assessee claimed partner's salary of Rs. 76,32,000/- as per section 40(b) of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer (AO) has not allowed the salary paid to partner as deduction. The ld.AR for the assessee stated that the disclosure was related to business of the assessee. No evidence has been brought by the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee has also submitted before the AO that the assessee has not debited any purchases on account of the impugned excess stock. No where the assessee has claimed that it was maintaining Stock Register for Gold and Silver. No stock register was produced before us. Rather as per statement of the partner it seems that no Stock Register was found during the survey. The relevant part of the statement recorded u/s 133A of the Act is reproduced hereunder : Q9: As per trading account produced today the quantity of gold is taken at 11420.600 gms and the net comes to 9136 gms at 80% of gross . But as per the Physical stock taken by the valuer the Gold Ornaments weight is 20211.040 gms and Net comes to 14382.335 gms as ascertain by the value....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ccount of the assessee firm.During the assessment , even before us , the assessee has not explained the source of the investment made in the purchase of 5246.335 gms gold and 16.3793 kg Silver. Thus, it is un-recorded unexplained investment. Section 69 is reproduced here under : Unexplained investments. 69. Where in the financial year immediately preceding the assessment year the assessee has made investments which are not recorded in the books of account, if any, maintained by him for any source of income, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source of the investments or the explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory, the value of the investments may be ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion 68 or section 69 or section 69A or section 69B or section 69C or section 69D. 115BBE. (1) Where the total income of an assessee includes any income referred to in section 68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D, the income-tax payable shall be the aggregate of- (a) the amount of income-tax calculated on income referred to in section 68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D, at the rate of thirty per cent; and (b) the amount of income-tax with which the assessee would have been chargeable had his total income been reduced by the amount of income referred to in clause (a). (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, no deduction in respect....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l Purchases amounting Rs. 33,47,19,658/- in the profit and loss account [para-2.10]. 7.1. However in the case of the assessee M/s Shaha Ashok Kumar G Rathod , the unaccounted purchases were not entered in the books. 7.2. Hence the case law relied by the assessee distinguishable on facts. 2) Lovish Singhal vs ITO 2018-Tax-Pub-(DT)-2944- (Jodh Tribu): In this case the ITAT has followed the decision of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Bajrang Traders. We have already discussed in earlier para that the decision of Hon'ble High Court is distinguishable on facts. Hence this case is also distinguishable on facts. 3) CIT Vs. S.K.Srigiri& Bros (Karnataka HC) 298 ITR 13: In this case the question b....