9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 1187X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... treating the same as invalid as reflected in para 8 of the assessment order, in our opinion is not justified. We, therefore, hold the revised return, based on which notice u/s 143(2) has been issued is valid return and since the assessee has disclosed cash as on 31.03.2015, no further addition of cash difference in original and revised return under section 68 of the Act is called for. Thus, ground raised by the assessee are allowed. Not considering the revised VAT returns reflecting increased in sales - We note that nothing was brought on record by the Department that the turnover as admitted in the sales tax return is incorrect and therefore, it establishes that the assessee correctly shown the sales and closing stock leading to cash on h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was conducted on 17.03.2017, in response to which, the assessee filed revised return of income on 31.03.2017 declaring same income as admitted in the original return of income filed under section 139(1) of the Act. He drew our attention to para 8 of the assessment order and submits that the finding of the Assessing Officer in treating the revised return as invalid is not justified. The ld. AR argued that the Assessing Officer made addition under section 68 of the Act only on the basis of revised return, but treated the revised return of income as invalid, is not correct. He drew our attention to the notice under section 143(2) of the Act dated 18.09.2017 and submits that the said notice was also issued in response to revised return of inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eturn of income and reply therein in response to notice under section 143(2) of the Act, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment in terms of the revised return of income, but, however, treating the same as invalid as reflected in para 8 of the assessment order, in our opinion is not justified. We, therefore, hold the revised return, based on which notice under section 143(2) of the Act has been issued is valid return and since the assessee has disclosed cash of ₹.42,34,151/- as on 31.03.2015, no further addition of cash difference in original and revised return of ₹.41,44,936/- under section 68 of the Act is called for. Thus, ground Nos. 2 3 raised by the assessee are allowed. 9. In view of our view taken in ground Nos. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd/2012 dated 31.10.2012 and the order of Ahmedabad Bench of ITAT in the case of Shree Sanand Textiles Industries Ltd. v. DCIT in ITA No. 995/Ahd/2014 Ors dated 06.01.2020, which are placed at page 29 and 67 of the paper book respectively. He argued that the assessee shown the turnover in the sales tax return at ₹.12,84,95,001/-, which was accepted and not disputed by the assessing authority. He argued that the observation of the Assessing Officer that the assessee intentionally revised the return to show increase in sales and reduction in closing stock, is not correct. We note that nothing was brought on record by the Department that the turnover as admitted in the sales tax return is incorrect and therefore, it establishes that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
