For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on Income Tax
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our Income-Tax Library

In the instant case, appeal is filed by revenue against the order passed by CIT wherein CIT deleted the addition made by AO on account of stock difference found during survey. The CIT (A) found that the appellant has already shown production of 574 tins on 20.09.2005 which has been verified by the AO during the course of remand proceedings and has been found to be correct. Held that—We find that the CIT (A) has analyzed the items wise details of stock difference worked out by the AO and submission made by the assessee. CIT (A) has called for a remand report from the AO. AO vide his remand report dated 18.01.2010 has verified the contentions of the assessee and same stands re-examined by the CIT (A) and found to be correct. CIT (A) has deleted the addition made by the AO based on remand report of the AO. Hence, Revenue should not have any grievance now as the decision of CIT (A) is based on verification carried out by the AO during the course of remand report proceedings. We have gone through the remand report as well as the order of CIT (A) and found that the CIT (A) has confirmed the items of stock around 25 lakhs, which were not reconciled by the assessee and deleted the addition of those items, which stood reconciled and stand verified by the AO. Addition on account of difference in cash not explained during survey - Held that—We find that the assessee has explained that cash was found short as it was given to various parties as advance on the date of survey, which remained to be entered in to cashbook, and it was accounted for next day. We further are of the view that no addition can be made on account of shortage of cash. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of CIT (A), accordingly, same is upheld. This grounds of appeal is therefore, dismissed.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Section 69, 132 of Income Tax Act, 1961—In the instant case, appeal is filed by revenue against the order passed by CIT wherein CIT deleted the addition made by AO on account of stock difference found during survey.

The CIT (A) found that the appellant has already shown production of 574 tins on 20.09.2005 which has been verified by the AO during the course of remand proceedings and has been found to be correct.

Held that—We find that the CIT (A) has analyzed the items wise details of stock difference worked out by the AO and submission made by the assessee. CIT (A) has called for a remand report from the AO. AO vide his remand report dated 18.01.2010 has verified the contentions of the assessee and same stands re-examined by the CIT (A) and found to be correct.

CIT (A) has deleted the addition made by the AO based on remand report of the AO. Hence, Revenue should not have any grievance now as the decision of CIT (A) is based on verification carried out by the AO during the course of remand report proceedings. We have gone through the remand report as well as the order of CIT (A) and found that the CIT (A) has confirmed the items of stock around 25 lakhs, which were not reconciled by the assessee and deleted the addition of those items, which stood reconciled and stand verified by the AO.

Addition on account of difference in cash not explained during survey - Held that—We find that the assessee has explained that cash was found short as it was given to various parties as advance on the date of survey, which remained to be entered in to cashbook, and it was accounted for next day. We further are of the view that no addition can be made on account of shortage of cash. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of CIT (A), accordingly, same is upheld. This grounds of appeal is therefore, dismissed.[ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, RAJKOT VERSUS M/S. MORBI VEGETABLES PRODUCTS LTD.] [2018] [7] [ITCD Online] [77] [ ITAT RAJKOT]

In the instant case, appeal is filed by revenue against the order passed by CIT wherein CIT deleted the addition made by AO on account of stock difference found during survey. The CIT (A) found that the appellant has already shown production of 574 tins on 20.09.2005 which has been verified by the AO during the course of remand proceedings and has been found to be correct. Held that—We find that the CIT (A) has analyzed the items wise details of stock difference worked out by the AO and submission made by the assessee. CIT (A) has called for a remand report from the AO. AO vide his remand report dated 18.01.2010 has verified the contentions of the assessee and same stands re-examined by the CIT (A) and found to be correct. CIT (A) has deleted the addition made by the AO based on remand report of the AO. Hence, Revenue should not have any grievance now as the decision of CIT (A) is based on verification carried out by the AO during the course of remand report proceedings. We have gone through the remand report as well as the order of CIT (A) and found that the CIT (A) has confirmed the items of stock around 25 lakhs, which were not reconciled by the assessee and deleted the addition of those items, which stood reconciled and stand verified by the AO. Addition on account of difference in cash not explained during survey - Held that—We find that the assessee has explained that cash was found short as it was given to various parties as advance on the date of survey, which remained to be entered in to cashbook, and it was accounted for next day. We further are of the view that no addition can be made on account of shortage of cash. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of CIT (A), accordingly, same is upheld. This grounds of appeal is therefore, dismissed.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

The CIT (A) found that the appellant has already shown production of 574 tins on 20.09.2005 which has been verified by the AO during the course of remand proceedings and has been found to be correct.