9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 633X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal of the Revenue arises from the order of the CIT(A), Amritsar, dated 12.07.2011 for the assessment year 2007-08. 2. The Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by the AO at ₹ 10,07,595/- by invoking the provisions of section 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... take. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the burden to prove that the quantity of stock given in the statement furnished to the bank was correct, had been on the assessee in view of the provisions of section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the judgement of Hon ble ITAT, A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that cement worth ₹ 10,72,575/- towards 4704 bags of cement hypothecated to the bank as on 31.3.2007 which gave a vast variation of ₹ 10,07,595/- ( as per information supplied by assessee s bankers as on 31.03.2007 at ₹ 10,72,575 (4704 bags @ ₹ 228/- per bag) minus closing stock valued as per closing stock in the trading account as on 31.03.2007 at ₹ 64,980/- (Rs.285 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted or suppressed so as to show under valuation of the closing stock. The assessee all along had been admitting of exaggerated reporting of its closing stock of cement to its bankers to secure over-draft limit. Therefore, the AO was not justified in making addition under section 69 in view of the decisions of various courts of law relied upon by the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) accordingly deleted t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... H), CIT vs. Sidhu Rice General Mills 281 ITR 428 (P H) and decision of Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. N. Swamy 241 ITR 363 (Mad.), the AO in the present case is not justified in making any addition under section 69 of the Act, in the absence of any positive material of any investment outside the books of account. Thus, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A), who ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
