2015 (4) TMI 16 - SC - Income Tax

Unaccounted production, sales and closing stock of finished products - whether in respect of sales of 32,809 kg., which are shown in the stock register of M/s. Ashish Agro Plast Private Limited, there has been double taxation - Held that - The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that on the aforesaid sales, which are found in the accounts of M/s Ashish Plastic Industries, the receipts are shown as income on which tax has been paid by M/s Ashish Agro Plast Private Limited. Also learned counsel submitted that he can bring satisfactory evidence in support of this plea. We are of the view that the order of the authorities below should be sustained but if the appellant is able to prove that tax on the income generated from the sale of the aforesaid 32809 Kg. of material has been paid by M/s Ashish Agro Plast Private Limited, benefit thereof should be extended to the appellant. For this purpose, therefore, we remand the case back to the assessing authority, who shall give an opportunity to the assessee to demonstrate as to whether the sister concern has already paid the tax on the aforesaid income from the aforesaid sales and if that is shown, to the extent tax is paid, benefit shall be accorded to the appellant. - Decided in favour of assessee by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
1. Unaccounted production, sales, and closing stock of finished products.
2. Double taxation on sales of 32,809 kg.

Analysis:
Issue 1: The appellant, a registered firm manufacturing PVC pipes, underwent survey operations under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, where discrepancies in stock valuation were found. The partners admitted to the excess stock, leading to additions in the assessment order. The appellant claimed that sales by a sister concern were wrongly attributed to them, supported by documents. Despite evidence showing the sales were made by the sister concern, unaccounted sales were identified, upholding the additions by the assessing authority, Commissioner (Appeals), Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, and the High Court. The High Court dismissed the appeal citing no substantial question of law.

Issue 2: The Supreme Court granted leave limited to determining if the addition on the sales of 32,809 kg would result in double taxation. The appellant argued that tax had already been paid by the sister concern on the income generated from these sales. The Court upheld the lower authorities' order but remanded the case to verify if tax had been paid by the sister concern. If proven, the appellant would receive the benefit of tax already paid by the sister concern. The appeal was disposed of with this direction.