9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 670X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on - HELD THAT:- Tribunal held that CIT(A) has analysed the submissions of the assessee as well as findings of the AO and after arrived at a fair reasonable valuation of closing stock, hence the findings of the CIT(A) in reducing the closing stock to ₹ 5,61,588/- from ₹ 27,66,485A is therefore upheld. Addition on account of motor case expenses and depreciation - Tribunal deleted addition - HELD THAT:- Tribunal took the view that the CIT(A) correctly deleted the said addition. In such circumstances, the Tribunal thought fit not to interfere. No error not to speak of any error of law could be said to have been committed by the Tribunal in passing the impugned order. None of the questions proposed by the Revenue could be te ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C] Whether the Appellate Tribunal has substantially erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowances of ₹ 8437/- made on account of motor case expenses and depreciation? 3. On the first proposed question, the findings recorded by the Tribunal are as under : 14. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record and considered the relevant facts. The perusal of the assessment order reveals that the AO found that the books of accounts maintained by the assessee were defective as the AO found that the production register of 5EGN on 11.05.1997 entry has been erased, similarly, entry dated 12.05.1997, 13.05.1997 were also erased. Further, the, produc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t order evasive, misleading and having with alterior motive, Therefore, findings of the CIT(A) that the assessee has not made any purchases from M/s. Santoshi Bhandar is found to be correct, accordingly, we concurred the view taken by the Lower Authorities. With regard to the purchase of OGS of ₹ 6,65,80,561/- of 10631.250 kg of Ground Nut Oil Cake claimed to be made from M/s.Santoshi Bhandar are not found genuine. However, the assessee as exported the goods, therefore, the assessee might have purchased these goods locally from third party. The AO, therefore, estimated 20% of goods ₹ 6,65,80,561/- for which worked out to ₹ 1,33,16,115/- as unexplained investment and added the same as undisclosed income. The AO further quan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he peak amount of purchase at ₹ 10,08,844/-on 10.05.1997 is less than the confirmed addition, hence, the total addition was confirmed at ₹ 29,95,775/- and balance addition out of ₹ 1,33,16,116/- was deleted. We find that these findings of the CIT(A) are correct as the CIT(A) has considered its findings by following the decision of Tribunal in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd., (Supra) and allowed the setoff of peak amount worked out by the AO at ₹ 10,08,444/-. In the light of these facts, we do not find any infirmity in the order of CIT(A) in confirming the addition at ₹ 29,95,75/-as against the addition made by the AO at ₹ 1,33,16,112/- therefore, the appeal of the Revenue in respect of Ground No.1 is dism ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt, accordingly the CIT(A) has deleted the addition in respect of Gunny Bags at ₹ 2242/- which we find in order. It was further noticed by the CIT(A) that the AO has taken value of goods to be exported on the basis of sale bills issued which is against the basic principle accountancy as the closing stock is to be valued. At cost or market value whichever is lower. The market value is not to be adopted as per sale price which includes profit and other cose. Therefore, the CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition of ₹ 9,85,032/- on account of value of closing stock of ground nut, hence we do not find any infirmity in deletion of this addition. Similarly, the CIT(A) has deleted the addition of ₹ 11,26,513/- out of closing sto ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 77; 8,437/- made on account of the motor car expenses and depreciation. The Tribunal took the view that the CIT(A) correctly deleted the said addition. In such circumstances, the Tribunal thought fit not to interfere. 7. Having heard Ms. Bhatt, the learned senior standing counsel appearing for the Revenue and having gone through the materials on record, we are of the view that no error not to speak of any error of law could be said to have been committed by the Tribunal in passing the impugned order. None of the questions proposed by the Revenue could be termed as the substantial questions of law involved in the present Tax Appeal. 8. In the result, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. - - Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
