9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 206X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cast accounts. If this finding is accepted, the question of adjusting the difference as 'unexplained investment' does not arise. Appellant has raised this specific ground in Memorandum of appeal. Thus, we are of the considered view that the findings recorded by the ITAT in para 11.5.6 is not sustainable and therefore, this appeal merits consideration. - I.T.A NO.638 OF 2015 - - - Dated:- 22-7-2022 - HON BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR AND HON BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA APPELLANT (BY SHRI. V. CHANDRA SEKHAR FOR SHRI. M. LAVA, ADVOCATES) RESPONDENT (BY SHRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) JUDGMENT P.S. DINESH KUMAR J, This appeal by the assessee has been admitted to consider following substantial questi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome of Rs.1,31,940/- was taken up for scrutiny and details were called for by the Assessing Officer. The Books of Accounts and purchase register produced by the assessee were impounded and it was found that purchase to the extent of Rs.1,43,64,108/- and sale to the extent of Rs.1,69,28,140/- was not accounted in the regular books of accounts. The Assessing Officer passed an order under Section 143(3) of the IT Act adding suppressed profit of Rs.25,64,032/-. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee challenged the same before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer in ITA No.97/CIT(A)/Mys/09-10 dated November 29, 2011. On further appeal in ITA No.230/Bang/2012, the ITAT vide order dated December 26, 2012 remanded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sale and purchase prices outside the books as suppressed profit. Hence, the questions raised in this appeal do not merit any consideration. 6. We have carefully considered rival contentions and perused the records. 7. Undisputed facts of the case are, in the first round of litigation, Assessing Officer's order was unsuccessfully challenged before CIT(A). On further appeal, ITAT remanded the matter to the CIT(A). By his order dated June 27, 2013, CIT(A) has held as follows: Accordingly the case has been heard. The appellant has furnished the trading account highlighting the effect of the omissions which is as follows: Original Final ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T (Appeals) that the difference between the unaccounted sales and purchases would include an amount of Rs.1,69,289 towards suppressed profits from the unaccounted transactions and the balance amount represents the undisclosed investment in unaccounted purchases. 9. A careful perusal of the orders passed by CIT(A) and ITAT extracted above, clearly shows that according to ITAT, CIT(A) had taken profit element on unaccounted sales as Rs.1,69,281/- (i.e., at 1% of unaccounted sales of Rs.1,69,28,140/-) and considered the balance amount of difference as unexplained investment and adjusted the same in the closing stock. Shri. Chandrasekar is right in his submission that this finding is not found in the order passed by CIT(A). The ITAT has re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
