9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (1) TMI 265X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 10,000 on account of alleged sale of assets but, however, upheld the addition of Rs. 1,50,000. The assessee has, therefore, come in appeal against sustaining of this addition. 4. Learned authorised representative started his arguments drawing my attention on a letter filed on 13th Feb., 1992, and addressed to ITO, Survey-cum-CIB, contents of which are as under: "The assessee has informed us that he was put to undue pressure during the course of survey and that too at a time when Jai Narain Gupta, head of the family, expired on 31st Jan., 1992. At the time when the survey took place, all the members of the family were in mourning and in a disturbed state of mind. The survey operation commenced during the day time and concluded as late as 11.00 PM. All through this period the assessee were put to great undue pressure and with such unwarranted pressure disclosure of Rs. 1,50,000 was extorted from the instant assessee. There is no ground nor relevance for such a disclosure to be made. It is, therefore, requested that even the cheque which was issued payable on 15th March, 1992, may kindly not be presented for encashment because it is found that the disclosure is incorrectly ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Particulars for the financial year from 1st April, 1991, to 4th Feb., 1992, were also filed before the AO with a copy of the purchase bills based on cogent and admitted evidence which was duly accepted even under s. 143(3) in the earlier year and it was submitted that when there was no shortfall in quantity of assets as per books as compared to the quantity inventorised by the survey team there was no substance nor any occasion for the appellant-firm to make any surrender which was, therefore, obviously a forced one which the appellant made under pressure of the survey team specially since the father of the partner had expired only on 31st Jan., 1992, and the survey being carried on 4th Feb., 1992, when even the heat of the ashes of the deceased father had not cooled and the survey team continued to remain in the premises from morning till 11 pm at night under which circumstances the surrender was made and the retraction was made on the 13th day from the date of death after the family was free from attending to the customary rituals. 7. The admitted details of the goods was also available in the books of accounts with the appellant at the time of survey and which were duly signe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same to be alleged profit on the alleged sale of the alleged goods. 10. He further submitted that there is no proof or any evidence to show that there was any sale of assets as alleged by the AO which allegation admittedly is a notional one since the AO himself conjectured that the assessee must have disposed of the goods'. This is a clear-cut case of arbitrary and conjecturous manner of making an assessment which as per the settled position of law, is not the proper way of making an assessment. It is vehemently submitted that once the appellant had established that the goods available as per the books of accounts duly supported with the copy of purchase bills which had been accepted in the earlier assessment, there was no room for any addition in light of the fact that the goods inventorised by the survey team were shown to the AO and admitted by him to be covered by the recorded quantity of the goods in books of accounts. 11. Secondly, an addition of Rs. 1,44,660 was made by the AO on account of an alleged difference in the value of goods as on 31st March, 1992, as compared to the value of goods worked out by the AO as on 4th Feb., 1992. The value of goods inventorised ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rrect application of the law. The settled position of law is that the ultimate purpose of proceedings of assessment is to assess the tax liability correctly. It is also a settled point of law that it would not be open to assessing authorities to tax an assessee where it can be seen that there is no just reason for doing so. It is the correctness of the assessed income which is the sum and substance of the process of assessment and not otherwise. Moreover, the AO in his assessment order has nowhere held that he was making the addition because the assessee had made a surrender. In fact, the AO had tacitly admitted that the assessee had retracted the surrender for the reasons as stated in the letter dt. 13th Feb., 1992. The AO further admitted that the assessee was called upon to reconcile the inventory of working assets as per the books of accounts with the inventory drawn by the survey team. As such, it is a case of appreciation of merits and on merits the appellant has sufficiently demonstrated that the quantity inventorised by the survey team was available in the books of accounts which was duly signed by the survey team at the time of survey. The particulars of the same were duly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
