2000 (1) TMI 147 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the assessment framed in violation of provisions of ss. 158BB and 158BC(c) of the Act.
2. Addition of Rs. 1,15,00,000 on account of alleged unexplained investment in stocks.
3. Addition of Rs. 1,03,437 on account of alleged sales outside books of accounts.

Summary:

1. Validity of the Assessment:
The assessee challenged the validity of the assessment u/s 158BC(c) of the IT Act, arguing that the AO did not follow the prescribed procedure for making the block assessment. The Tribunal noted that procedural defects, if any, are curable and do not render the assessment invalid. The AO is directed to look into the points raised by the assessee and complete a fresh assessment as per the provisions of law, particularly considering ss. 158BC(c) and 158BB(1) of the Act.

2. Addition of Rs. 1,15,00,000 on Account of Alleged Unexplained Investment in Stocks:
The AO made an addition of Rs. 1,15,00,000 based on the statement of Shri R.P. Monga u/s 132(4), who surrendered the amount as undisclosed investment in stocks. The assessee contended that the stock was valued on the basis of retail price instead of wholesale price, leading to an inflated figure. The Tribunal observed discrepancies in the valuation and calculation mistakes. It emphasized that an admission is not conclusive and can be rebutted. The matter is remanded back to the AO for fresh consideration, including verifying the method of stock valuation, correcting calculation mistakes, and independently quantifying any discrepancy in stock value without solely relying on the surrender made by Shri R.P. Monga.

3. Addition of Rs. 1,03,437 on Account of Alleged Sales Outside Books of Accounts:
The AO made an addition based on a list of stocks found at the residential premises, which was inferred to be related to sales outside the books. The assessee explained that the list pertained to a Court case against M/s Bashiruddin & Co. for manufacturing duplicate goods under the assessee's trade name. The Tribunal noted that the AO did not examine M/s Bashiruddin & Co. and the inference was a mere assumption. The matter is remanded back to the AO for a fresh decision after examining the evidence and hearing the assessee.

Conclusion:
The appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes, with directions for the AO to reassess the issues considering the Tribunal's observations and the provisions of law.