9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 851X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und of appeal of the assessee is allowed with above direction. Excess opening stock - Addition of difference in the opening stock as well as the closing stock - HELD THAT:- AO did not care to consider that whether the assessee is having the above stock as actual stock with the assessee and if so what is the source of investment for the above stock. The Assessing Officer has not even examined the source of stock nor was such stock found during the course of survey on 17.09.2013 and 29.09.2013. No purchase vouchers or details were also found during the course of survey. In view of this, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals) and thus, the solitary ground of appeal of the ld. Assessing Officer is dismissed. - ITA No. 4163/Del/2016, ITA. No. 4679 (Del) of 2016 - - - Dated:- 16-3-2021 - Shri Amit Shukla, Judicial Member And Shri Prashant Maharishi, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri Tarun Aswani, Adv.; For the Revenue : Shri Ashok Kumar, Sr. D.R.; ORDER PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. ITA. No. 4163 (Del) of 2016 : 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accounts of the assessee were rejected and provisions of Section 145(3) of the Act were invoked. Consequently, 20% of all the expenditure were disallowed amounting to ₹ 12,64,822/-. An addition of ₹ 46,26,000/- was made for investment in purchase of house property. Assessee made cheque payment of ₹ 10 lakhs and cash payment of ₹ 33,35,000/- for purchase of above property . Assessee submitted that the above payment of ₹ 46,26,000/- is made from over-draft account. This contention was rejected by the Assessing Officer as no further information was filed. Further addition of ₹ 8,000/- was made by disallowance under Section 80C of the Act. Thus the total income of the assessee was assessed at ₹ 1,24,29,480/- against the returned income of ₹ 6,38,660/-. 3. Assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT (Appeals) contesting that the accounts prepared by the Chartered Accountant are bogus. The ld. CIT (Appeals) noted that assessee has shown turnover of ₹ 1,44,72,165/- and has not been able to prove the variation in the turnover in respect of revised return of income and the accounts. As the ld. CIT (A) for assessment year 2010- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1843 (Del) of 2015 filed by the Assessing Officer and Cross Objection No. 233 (Del) of 2016 filed by the assessee were decided on 27.09.2018. In para No. 8 the co-ordinate bench held that assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate evidence to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer regarding the turnover and expenses with respect to the profit and loss account and the balance sheet as it as stated that those were farzi version of accounts. In para No. 9 considering the totality of the facts of the case the matter was restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case directing the assessee to produce the books of accounts and audit report failing which the Assessing Officer shall pass an appropriate order as per law. In the present case the addition is also based on the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals) for assessment year 2010-11. This order has now been restored back to the ld AO for that year. Therefore, looking to the facts that when additions are confirmed on the basis of the order of ld CIT (A) for earlier years which has already been sent back to the ld AO for fresh decision, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. Therefore, I am of the view that the appellant's books of accounts should be rejected under section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and appellant's income from business should be estimated. Since the assessment order says that the appellant s sales was ₹ 3,16,93.527/-, I am of the view that appellant s net profit can be reasonably estimated at 5% of the above sales considering the nature of appellant s business and the fact that he was planning to expand his business by obtaining bank loans. Therefore, the profit of the appellant from business is estimated at ₹ 15,84,676/- (5% of 3,16,93,527/-) and the additions/ disallowance made by the Assessing Officer is deleted. The appellant s income is to be taken as ₹ 15,84,676/- instead of ₹ 6,05,122/- taken in the computation of the assessment order based on the net profit shown in the Profit Loss Account filed along with the return of income. No relief for deduction under section 80D or 80G is to be granted as no evidence regarding these payments were submitted by the appellant even during the appellate proceedings. Thus, the appellant gets a relief of ₹ 2,40,59,190/- (assessed income of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
