9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 492X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the assessee particularly for the period commencing from 01.10.2016 to 31.12.2016 and also the details of closing stock. Thus, the onus upon the assessee has duly been discharged in order to substantiate the sales made by the assessee and furthermore the ld. AO has practically not rejected the books of account prepared by the assessee, the addition is found to be not sustainable neither supported by any cogent reason rather found to have been made only on surmises and conjectures. Evidence and explanation so rendered by the assessee cannot be rejected in the absence of any corroborative material on record in the hands of the revenue as is the settle position of law in view of the order passed in the case of Lal Chand Bhagat Ambica Ram ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reply dated 09.12.2019 furnished the following details: • Copy of acknowledgment of return and computation of income for the relevant assessment year. (PB Page no. 3-5) • Copy of audited financial statements (PB Page no. 6-9) • Copy of tax audit report (PB Page no. 10-25) • Details of bank account along with the bank statements. (PB Page no. 44-59) • Details of month wise cash sales and cash deposit from 01.04.2016 to 31.03.2017 (PB Page no.60) 3. By filing a further reply dated 16.12.2019 the assessee furnished the chart showing quarterly details of purchase and sales made during AY 2017-18, VAT return of assessee filed each quarter for Assessment Year 2017-18, cash book for AY 2017-18, as well as regist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see. Further that no adverse inference were drawn in respect of business activities of the assessee rather the same has been admitted by the Ld. CIT(A); the stock details has not been disputed nor any defect and/or discrepancies found in the books of account prepared by the assessee and therefore, under this facts and circumstances of the matter, the addition is not sustainable in the eyes of law as was the crux of the submission made by the Ld. AR. In support of argument he has relied upon very many judgment in the following manner: "AO has not rejected the book results AND no discrepancy found in the stock, sales and purchases then the addition on the basis of higher average sales is not justified At the outset, it is submitted before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e sales as revenue receipt, there is no case for making the addition u/s 68 or tax the same u/s 115BBE again. This view is also supported by the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kailash Jewellery House [2010 (4) TMI 1070 - DELHI HIGH COURT] and Vishal Exports Overseas Ltd. [2012 (7) TMI 1110 - AHMEDABAD HIGH COURT] Hence, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and the same is upheld. - Decided against revenue. DCIT CIRCLE 4 (2) NEW DELHI VERSUS BAWA JEWELLERS PVT. LTD. KIRTI. NAGAR, WEST, NEW DELHI, 2023 (7) TMI 494 - June 9, 2023 It is further submitted that the case is also covered by the judgment of coordinate bench Hon'ble ITAT Delhi in the case of M/S. FINE GUJARANWALA JEWE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and it should stand on its own leg. The Assessing Officer without examining any parties to whom the goods are sold by the assessee, came to conclusion that the sales are not genuine, without even rejecting the books of account which is in our opinion is erroneous." Further the above decision of the coordinate bench has been followed by ITAT Mumbai in case of SANJAY SUMERMAL SONI VERSUS INCOME TAX WARD 2 (2), THANE, 2023 (9) TMI 378 - ITAT MUMBAI, dated 28.08.2023." 5. The Ld. DR though relied upon the order passed by the authorities below, but failed to draw our attention to any document which is contrary to the case made by the assessee or in support of the revenue to substantiate addition with cogent reason. We further find that the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
