9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (1) TMI 673X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nfirmed that they have not sold these to the assessee. Therefore, excess stock found at the time of survey necessarily belonged to the various artists who had got their work of art displayed at the gallery of the assessee and these were meant to be sold by the assessee on commission basis. In favour of assessee - ITA No.3315/Del/2009 - - - Dated:- 23-11-2012 - Rajpal Yadav And T.S. Kapoor, JJ. Appellant Rep by: Shri Sanjay Jain, Sr. DR. Respondents Rep by: Shri H. Raghvebdra Rao, Adv. Shri Rajeev Dimri, FCA ORDER Per: T.S. Kapoor: This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of Ld CIT(A) dated 20.5.200. The grounds raised by the revenue are as under:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad received goods on consignment and she was directed to reconcile the physical stock with the amount of stock appearing in the books of accounts and was further directed to furnish evidence in respect of stock received on consignment. Despite various reminders the assessee did not file any evidence in respect of stock received on consignment and Assessing Officer after allowing credit of Rs.1,50,000/- as her own stock as per books of accounts made an addition of Rs.34,87,903/- being the difference between physical stock and stock in the books. The Assessing Officer further made an addition of Rs.10 lakhs on the basis that due to huge stock the assessee must be having a good turnover other than the declared turnover in the books of accounts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... v) That the appellant had turnover of below Rs.10 lakhs p.a. and there were no details in the books of accounts being maintained. However, full; details of receipt of work of art and their return was available with the appellant. The Ld AR also enclosed confirmation from various artists confirming that they had sent stock on consignment basis to the assessee. vi) That Ld Assessing Officer ignored all the statements of the appellant, the material provided during the survey as well as during the hearing and had wrongly assumed that stock in hand belonged to the assessee. vii) That Ld Assessing Officer while passing the order has made an addition of Rs.10 lakhs on account of undisclosed turnover without application of mind whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t and it was accepted by the Sales Tax Department that appellant s stock on that date was Rs.31,050/- and stock worth Rs.18,80,289/- was on consignment basis and that this fact had escaped consideration because adequate opportunity of being heard was not allowed to the assessee. xv) That receipt book seized by the Department during survey belonged to the period of consignment received prior to March 31st, 2005 and Ld Assessing Officer had erred in law in working out the unexplained investment in stock during assessment year 2006-07 and assessment for the year 2005- 06 has already been completed after considering the said information and without any addition. 4. The Ld CIT(A) after going through the submissions of assessee deleted th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax Department that the assessee was holding stock of her own at Rs.31.050/- and consignment stock valued at Rs.18,80,289/- The assessment of the assessee in the year 2005-06 i.e. immediately before the assessment year under consideration was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act and order was passed on 27.11.2007 which was after the date of survey u/s 133A of the Act and there is no mention of the fact of any extra stock rather the returned income has been accepted as such. The assessee had also submitted before Ld CIT(A) that confirmations from 13 artists who had confirmed of their being owner of the items found at the premises of assessee and they have confirmed that they have not sold these to the assessee. Various confirmations along with ID ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
