9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (6) TMI 105X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... yr. 1984-85 the Tribunal's order in ITA No.1583/Del/1989 is dt.29th April, 1991and the Tribunal's order for asst. yr. 1985-86 in ITA No. 1584/Del/1989 is dt.19th June, 1991. Respectfully following the Tribunal's decisions aforesaid we delete the addition of Rs. 21,840. 4. Ground NO.1(c) pertains to the addition of Rs. 1,95,366 as income from trucks as against the loss shown by the assessee. 5. It was submitted sy Shri K.R. Manjani, the learned counsel for the assessee, that a similar addition had been made by the Assessing Officer for asst. yr. 1985-86 and that the Tribunal vide order dt.19th June, 1991had since remitted this issue to the file of the Assessing officer for fresh disposal. It was, therefore, submitted that for assessment year under consideration also the matter may be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision. The ld. Deptl. Representative has no objection to this.We accordingly remit the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh disposal after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. Ground NO.1(d) is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.31,847 under s.43B. This is on Account of unpaid sales-ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder consideration to be restricted to Rs.2,000. The assessee gets relief of Rs.2,000. 11. Ground NO.1(g) challenges the confirmation of addition of Rs.7,530 in respect of miscellaneous expenses.Shri Manjani submitted that the assessee was plying 14 trucks normally toBombay. It was submitted that during the year under consideration the assessee had to purchase certain cards from the Bombay police for which a sum of Rs.7,530 was paid on behalf of the assessee by the persons through whom the assessee was running the trucks.It was submitted that the invitation cards to be purchased from the police with a view to having smooth relationship without which the assessee could not operate his trucks and do the business peacefully and smoothly. It was also submitted that the payment of Rs. 7,530 was not doubted by the Departmental Authorities.Reliance in this regard was placed on the Supreme Court decision in CIT vs. Delhi safe Deposit Co. Ltd. (1982) 26 CTR (SC) 411 : (1982) 133 ITR 756 (SC) for the proposition that the true test of an expenditure laid out wholly and exclusively for the purposes of trade or business was that it was incurred by the assessee as incidental to his trade for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s when the goods on consignment had not physically reachedBombay. Out of the aforesaid 64 bags, the Assessing Officer noticed that 52 bags had been sold on various dates prior to16th Dec., 1985when the goods were sent toDelhifromBombay. The assessee Officer was, therefore of the opinion that the total value of sales made before 16th Dec., 1985 came of Rs. 4,35,367 and that these represented sales of undisclosed stock. He accordingly made an addition of Rs. 4,35,367 which was upheld by the first appellate authority. 16. Shri Manjani submitted that 64 bags of M/s Sunder Lal were no doubt sent on16th Dec., 1985which reachedBombayon20th Dec., 1985. It was, however, submitted that the assessee sent 64 bags of Hing belonging to it toBombayas per the following details; Date of despatch Packages/Bags sent Weight 26.11.1985 35 2,060 Kg. 26.11.1985 19 1,350 Kg. 26.11.1985 10 360 Kg. . 64 3,770 Kg. It was submitted that 64 bags of Hing were sent by the assessee from its head office atDelhito the branch office atBombayand a similar number of 64 bags were sent by M/s sunder ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hing were sent by the assessee to its branch office atBombayand a similar number of packages/bags had been sent by m/s Sunder Lal on consignment basis to the assessee's office atBombay. There is no denying the fact that even in the account of M/s Sunder Lal as appearing in the books of the assessee sales have been shown right from7th Dec., 1985when the goods on consignment were despatched fromDelhionly on16th Dec., 1985and had reachedBombayon20th Dec., 1985. We have, however, to analyse the matter in proper perspective. The question that has to be decided is this: whether the assessee manipulated the books of account or there was a mere clerical error in writing the books of account with regard to these 64 bags of Hing. From the details submitted by the assessee it is clear that there was no deficiency of Hing in the assessee's books.Indeed the balance of Hing available as per the assessee's books at Bombay as on 4th Dec., 1985 was 4277.900 Kg. From the vouchers of Jailakshmi Road Services Pvt. Ltd. dt.26th Nov., 1985it is clear that 3770Kg. Of Hing had been sent by the assessee fromDelhitoBombayon its own account. The sales of goods sent on consignment basis by M/s Sunder Lal coul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
