9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 246X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Miscellaneous Application No. 665 of 2021 in SMW(C ) No. 3 of 2020, the period of filing appeal during the COVID- 19 pandemic is to be excluded for the purpose of counting the limitation period. In view of this, the appeal is treated as filed within the limitation period. 3. The issue raised in Ground nos. 1,2 and 3 is against the part confirmation of addition of Rs. 72,96,000/- by the Ld. CIT(A) out of total addition of Rs. 1,63,24,000/- made by the AO u/s 68 of the Act. 4. Facts in brief are that the AO during the course of assessment proceedings noted that the assessee has received money under the head share capital of Rs. 33,64,800/- as well as share premium of Rs. 1,34,59,200/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... received by cheques by giving detailed findings that the assessee has proved the identity, creditworthiness of the investors and also the genuineness of the transactions while confirming the addition to the tune of Rs. 72,96,000/- where the money was made in cash from 128 investors on the ground that the said transactions were not genuine as they were made in cash. The ld CIT(A) also called for the remand report from the AO which was furnished by the AO vide letter dated 14.10.2019 in which no adverse inference was drawn by the ld AO. The ld AO observed and stated in that report that all the investors who invested by cheques have filed their PAN,s , ITRs, bank statements and balance sheets and also confirmed the transactions of investments ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d only on the ground that this investment were made in cash. Even the remand report called for by the Ld. CIT(A) in the appellate proceedings did not doubt the genuineness of the agricultural background of the investors and it was accepted by the AO himself that these persons were belonging to rural areas. We observe that the AO has harped on the sole basis of investments being in cash which cannot be a sole ground for making the additions particularly when the investors appeared personally before the AO in response to summons issued u/s 131 of the Act and admitted and confirmed the investments in the shares of the assesse company. Further we have perused the said remand report dated 14.10.2019 and find that nowhere in the remand report any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in brief are that a survey operation was conducted on the business premises of the assessee on 28.02.2011 u/s 133A of the Act. During the course of survey operation several discrepancies were noted in the stocks of paddy, rice and rice bran. The assessee accordingly made a disclosure of Rs. 50 Lakhs qua the excess stocks. During the course of assessment proceedings , the AO calculated the excess stocks to the extent of 10,164 quintals of common paddy the value of which comes of Rs. 1,01,64,000/-. The AO after allowing the credit of disclosure of stocks of Rs. 50 lacs computed the excess stocks at Rs. 51,34,000/- and added the same to the income of the assessee as unexplained investments besides making additions grossprofits and unexplained ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d herein above. Similarly the Ld. A.R. drew our attention to stock extracts of paddy miniket a copy of which is placed at page 466 of PB on which the assessee has shown Rs. 11,20,000/- representing 800 quintal in the inward column in the stock register which also continued till the year end up to 31.03.2011and stock as on the date was arrived at accordingly. The ld AR therefore submitted that stocks of Rs. 50 Lakhs stood incorporated in the books of account and also in the profit and loss account of the assessee and net profits were determined accordingly . The ld AR finally prayed that the order of ld CIT(A) may kindly be set aside by allowing the appeal of the assessee as the ld CIT(A) has completely failed to appreciate the facts on reco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ges Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT Appeal (civil) 3765 of 2007 wherein it has been held that no disallowance is required to be made as due tax has already been made under the Act by the recipient of income. 14. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the assessee has admitted the non-deduction of tax at source and thus reached a conclusion that assessee has committed a default u/s 194C of the Act. The ld CIT(A) also distinguished the decision in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (supra) and held that it was not applicable to the facts of the case as this case covers the issue of short deduction of tax whereas in the case of assessee it has failed to deduct TDS totally and thus confirmed the addit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
