9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 223X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt of excess stock made but however gave relief to the extent of Rs.11,48,950/- on account of duplication of the stock at pages 5 and 8 of the inventory of stock made at the time of survey - In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee are dismissed. - ITA No.1296/Bang/2010 & ITA No.05/Bang/2011 - - - Dated:- 12-6-2012 - SMT. P MADHAVI DEVI, AND SHRI JASON P BOAZ, JJ. Revenue by : Smt. Susan Thomas Jose, JCIT Assessee by : Smt. Sheetal, Advocate O R D E R PER P MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER : Both these are cross appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue. The cross appeals are directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) I at Bangalore dated 20.10.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he survey. The assessee filed his written explanation on 29.12.2008, the gist of which is as under : (a) We have been valuing stock on weighted average method and during the course of survey some adhoc rates have been assigned to the quantities. (b) The inventory is taken only on surmises and inventory is taken in round figures which we do not do. (c) Inventory taken on date of survey does not mention colour number or name and a standard number of meters has been assumed by the department. (d) On page number 5 8 of inventory there is duplication. (e) Even the stock of accessories has been taken into consideration. (f) There are some totaling errors and due to paucity of time we are not able to give details. 3. After consid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... survey. 5. Aggrieved by the confirmation of the addition by the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us, while the Revenue is in appeal against the relief given by the CIT(A). 6. The learned counsel for the assessee Smt. Sheetal Borkar, while reiterating the submissions made before the authorities below, submitted that the assessee is a regular Income-tax payer and has maintained its books of accounts in accordance with law and the audit report is also filed along with the return of income. She submitted that no defects have been pointed out by the auditor with regard to the valuation of stock. She submitted that at the time of survey, the inventories of stock has been made on surmises without taking into consideration the actual s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erein are of dupian silk and mix 4, it is of common knowledge that the quality of dupian silk also varies and, therefore, two different rates are appearing in the two sheets, there is no duplication of the stock by the survey party. She also relied on the statement of the managing partner of the assessee firm to state that the managing partner had not taken any objection relating to duplication of stock on pages 5 and 8 of the inventory of stock at the time of survey. Thus, according to her, the CIT(A) ought not to have given the relief to the assessee but instead should have confirmed the entire addition. 8. Having heard both the parties and having considered the rival contentions, we find that the only issue before us is the addition on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the valuation on page 8 on which the higher price was adopted for the same stock. Coming to the valuation of stock on other sheets, we find that except stating that the valuation of stock is arbitrary, the assessee has not produced any evidence to substantiate its claim. As rightly pointed out by the learned DR, the valuation has been done in the premises of the assessee with the assistance of the staff of the assessee and the assessee has never raised any objections about the valuation till the assessment stage. Therefore, we find that the difference in the valuation is not properly explained by the assessee. In view of the same, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A). 9. In the result, the appeal filed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
