9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 571X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cancelled now. It is submitted that it may he held so now. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming action of the Ld. A.O. in estimating purchases of imported at Rs. 92,62,756 and sales of Rs. 2,04,77,358. It is submitted that these are estimated without any basis and need to be deleted. It is submitted that may be held so now. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming action of the Ld. AO in estimating Gross profit @30% and confirming addition of Rs. 24,80,333/-. It is submitted that Ld. AO has erred in estimating gross profit without any basis and needs to be deleted. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the estimation of gross profit needs to be cancelled and actual profit being genuine, ought to have been confirmed. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming action of the Ld. AO not allowing set off of Business Loss of Rs. 4,62,863 as claimed by assessee. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, loss being genuine, ought to have been allowed. 6 The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming action of the Ld. AO not allowed deductions of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d questionnaire was issued on 03.09.2018, 11.10.2018 and 142(1) notice dated 11.10.2018. Show cause notice was issued on 26.11.2018 in respect of producing some evidence like bills and vouchers. The assessee filed reply and the details. The Assessing Officer observed that as per the income tax return of the assessee, the relevant figures in respect of closing stock is Rs. 50,32,703/-, opening stock is Rs. 31,81,407/-., purchases are shown at Rs. 54,15,553/-. The assessee has shown net loss in his business of trading of dental products. The Assessing Officer further noticed that on perusal of Form 3CD, at para 35(a) to 35(bc) the tax auditors have not mentioned quantitative details which are mandatory in case of manufacturing and trading for true and fair disclosure. The assessee vide reply dated 16.11.2018 submitted that the assessee has not maintained stock register. The assessee has submitted quantitative details of dental products subsequently and as per the same, the Assessing Officer observed that quantitative details of dental products showing opening balance quantity 3932 total number of items and closing balance quantity 10881 total no. of items and the listed number of ite ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t) - Import bills - Form 15CA - VAT Annual return - Detailed Ledger of sales 4% - Detailed Ledger of sales OGS 2% - Detailed Ledger of Sales OGS 5% - Acknowledgement of ITR and STI - Trading Account, Profit & Loss Account and Balance Sheet - Tax Audit Report 5.2 The Ld. AR further submitted that no specific defect was found by the Assessing Officer either in the Books of Account or in the above referred documentary evidences. The Ld. AR further submitted that non-maintenance of stock register cannot be the ground for rejection of the Books of Account under Section 145(3) of the Act. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: - - Jaytick Intermediates P. Ltd. - 242 Taxman 319 (Guj) - CIT vs. Smt. Poonam Rai - 326 ITR 223 (Delhi) - Mansi Prints Pvt. Ltd. - ITA Nos.498 & 872/Ahd/2009 5.3 The Ld. AR further submitted that the Assessing Officer rejected books of account broadly on the count that there was some discrepancy in the earlier submissions made by the assessee vis-a-vis total traded items (200 v. 350 items). However, the Assessing Officer did not verify quantitative details furnished eventually by the assessee has not found any fault in the same. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llowing the set-off of business loss of Rs. 4,62,863/- as the said set-off must be allowed in the larger interest of justice. As regards ground no.6, the Ld. AR submitted that the disallowance in Chapter VIA in relation to deduction of Rs. 1,55,735/- should also have been allowed. 6. The Ld. DR submitted that the CIT(A) has categorically mentioned in paragraph no. 5.5 that the Gross Profit additions were ought to be Rs. 68,25,786/- in the trading account of the assessee, considering that there was no closing stock remaining to be sold at the end of the year. The revised Gross Profit as per trading account should have been Rs. 68,25,786/- and less already shown at 14,92,899/- which came to Rs. 53,32,887/-. The assessee could not produce the purchase bills/vouchers which were shown in the closing stock in the trading account. Thus, the mark-up margin of 50% has already been given by the Assessing Officer upon these traded goods but these figures have been taken by the Assessing Officer arbitrarily without brining any material to compare with and hence having regard to the material available on record with the Assessing Officer, the CIT(A) has directed the Assessing Officer to take m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
