9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 828X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the amount was lying at the residence of the Director. As per impugned order Statement of Harkantbhai P. Vyas Accountant of the assessee company was recorded which revealed closing cash balance and as per prevailing system it is kept at the residence of the same director of the company. Revenue ought to have deputed to verify the statement of the Accountant but department did not deputed anyone so in these circumstances of the department cannot be accepted. Thus, this ground of appeal is allowed. Disallowance on account of stock difference - HELD THAT:- Appellant was not provided a copy of alleged survey inventory nor a statement of recorded by the survey party and assessee retracted his submission by way of letter and same statement wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r vehicle repairing, ₹ 1,700/- on account of scooter repairing, ₹ 10,000/- on account of petrol, diesel and maintenance expenses, ₹ 11,250/- on account of travelling expenses and ₹ 7,000/- on account of telephone expenses, when there is no justification in confirming such adhoc expenses being a case of company assessee in view of decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron Engg. Co. Vs. CIT 253 ITR 339(Guj.). The same may be deleted. 3. On facts and in law as well as in the circumstances of the case of the appellant, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining disallowance of ₹ 33,288/- on account of difference in bank balance, when there is no justification in confirming su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allowance of ₹ 64,25,896/- on account of stock difference, when there is no justification in confirming such disallowance. The same may be deleted. 9. On facts and in law as well as in the circumstances of the case of the appellant, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining disallowance of ₹ 94,000/- on account of unexplained repair charges, when there is no justification in confirming such disallowance. The same may be deleted. 2. Out of nine grounds, ground nos. 1,2,3,4 9 have not pressed by the assessee on account of smallness of tax effect. 3. Briefly facts of the case are that the appellant is a domestic company and is engaged in the business in manufacturing of bulk drug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on record in the form of audit report u/s. 44AB of the Act, the same is at page 143 144 of the paper book. Since the audited books of accounts were not rejected and the book results stand accepted and also the alleged discrepancy stand duly reconciled. Therefore, we have no hesitation in deleting the addition made of ₹ 33,58,214/-. Thus this ground of appeal is allowed. 9. Now we come to ground relating to confirming the disallowance of ₹ 4,39,034/- on account of cash shortage by the ld. CIT(A). 10. Ld. A.O. has discussed the issue in Para 21 of the assessment order. As per A.O. there was a difference of cash of ₹ 4,39,034/- found at the business premises of the assessee. However, the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... We just fail to understand how in a short span of time survey party made the statement after calculating and weighing the item and addition has been made solely on the accounting and weighing of the stock. 13. Assessee cited an order of Jurisdictional High Court in the matter of K. Chokshi wherein it is mentioned that the statement was taken in the course of survey proceeding which is legally but no binding force, as assessee has also retracted the statement and assessee is subject to excise duty and excise department has not found any discrepancy in the stock of the assessee. Therefore, in these circumstances, an addition made by the department cannot sustain. Therefore, we delete the addition of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
