Radhakrishna Gold Jewellary Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad V. The Jt.CIT(OSD)Circle-5, Ahmedabad

ITA 174/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 89495 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-05-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 31-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 18-01-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DINESH SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: S N DIVATIA
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources
• Section: 142(1); 12

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD A BENCH BEFORE: S H RI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBE R AND ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER RADHAKRISHNA GOLD JEWELLARY PVT. LTD, 1, C.P. CHAMBERS, SHETH NI, POLE, RATANPOLE, AHMEDABAD - 380001 PAN: AACR 4091 E (APPELLANT) VS JCIT (OSD), CIRLCE - 5, AHMEDABAD (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: S H RI S.N. DIVATIA , A.R. REVENUE BY: S H RI DINESH SINGH , SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 31 - 03 - 2 015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26 - 05 - 2 015 / ORDER P ER : RAJPAL YADA V , JUDICIAL MEMBER : - ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) - XI DATED 6 TH NOVEMBER, 2012 PASS ED FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10. THE GROUND S OF APPEAL TAKEN BY A SSESSEE ARE NOT IN CONSONANCE TO RULE 8 OF ITAT RULES 1963, T HEY ARE DE SCRIPTIVE AND ARGUMENTATIVE IN NATURE . 2. IN BRIEF, ITS GRIEVANCE IS THAT LD. CIT(A), HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF R S. 26,68,441/ - OF ASSESSEE, WHICH WAS ADDED BY THE I T A NO . 174 / A HD/20 13 A SSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10 I.T.A NO. 174 /AHD/20 13 A.Y. 2009 - 10 PAGE NO RADHAKRISHNA GOLD JEWELLARY PVT. LTD VS. JCIT 2 ASSESSING OFFICER, ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED EXCESS STOCK FOUND AT THE PREMISES O F ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS A PVT. LTD COMPANY, ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING AND SALE OF GOLD ORNAMENTS ETC. IT HAS FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 30 TH SEPTEMBER, 2009 DECLARING A N INCOME OF RS. 47,27,146/ - . THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT AND A NOTICE U/S. 143(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT WAS ISSUED ON 20 TH SEPTEMBER, 2010 WHICH WAS SERVED ON 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2010. THE LD . AO THEREAFTER , ISSUED A QUESTIO NNAIRE U/S. 142(1) ON 12 TH JANUARY, 2011. A SURVEY U/S. 1 33(A) WAS CONDUCTED AT THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE AT VASTRAPUR AND RATANPOLE ON 27 - 08 - 2008. DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY EXCESS STOCK HAVING VALUE OF RS. 8 5,17,439/ - WAS DETECTED . LD. AO HAS NOTICED THE WORK ING OF EXCESS STOCK IN PARA 3 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WHICH READS AS UNDER: - 1) PHYSICAL INVENTORY OF STOCK FOUND AT VASTRAPUR RS. 1,33,,03,011/ - 2) PHYSICAL INVENTORY OF STOCK FOUND AT RAT ANPOLE RS. 77,29,694/ - ------------------------- TOTAL RS. 2,10,32,705/ - LESS: STOCK AS ON 27/08/08 AS PER BOOKS OF A/C. RS. 1,25,15,266/ - EXCESS STOCK FOUND RS. 85,17,439/ - 4. DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY STATEMENT OF D IRECTOR, SHRI VINODBHAI D. SONI WAS RECORDED U/S. 133A(3 ) OF THE ACT. IN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION NO. 22, HE ACCEPTED THE WORKING OF EXCESS STOCK AND SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE WILL DISCLOSE THE EXCESS STOCK IN I TS RETURN OF INCOME. HOWEVER, WHILE FILING THE RETURN, ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED INVESTMENT IN STOCK OF RS. 58,48,997/ - ONLY. THE WORKING MADE BY THE ASSES SEE HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BY THE AO IN PARA NO. 3.1 WHICH READS AS UNDER: - TOTAL AMOUNT OF EXCESS STOC K DISCLOSED IN THE SURVEY RS. 85,17,438/ - LESS: DIFFERENCE IN BILLS RECEIVED/NOT RECEIVED I.T.A NO. 174 /AHD/20 13 A.Y. 2009 - 10 PAGE NO RADHAKRISHNA GOLD JEWELLARY PVT. LTD VS. JCIT 3 BILL NOT RECEIVED & TAKEN IN CALCULATION OF EXCESS STOCK F ROM JAIN CREATION BILL NO. 56 DTD. 21/08/2008 3000 RS. 35,68,000/ - LESS: BILL NOT RECEIVED BUT TA KEN AT THE TIME OF SURVEY FROM OASIS JEWELLS 2500 GM LESS: ACTUAL BILL RECD. FOR 1662.64 GM EXCESS TAKEN IN SURVEY 837.36 GM 837.36 GM NET STOCK 2162.28 GM 22 CARET ORNAMENT 2357.28 GM VALUED AT 1132 PER GRAM (2357.28 GM X 1132/ - ) R S. 26,68,441/ - AMOUNT OF EXCESS STOCK TAKEN AS DISCLOSED INCOME RS. 58,48,997/ - 5. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE, IT HAD RECEIVED 25,00 GRAMS OF GOLD FROM M/S. OASIS JEWEL L S BEFO RE THE DATE OF SURVEY WHOSE BILL WAS YET TO BE RECEIVED. WHEN ASSESSEE HAD RECE IVED THE BILL, THEN IT REVEALED THAT HIS CONCERN HAS GIVEN ONLY 1662. 64 GM OF GOLD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE EXCESS OF 837.36 GRAM G OLD WAS ADMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AS UNACCOUNTED AND IT HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN THE TOTAL VALUE OF THE GOLD DISCLOSED BY ASSESSEE AT RS. 58,48,997/ - . THE ASSESSEE FURTHER CONTENDED THAT IT HAS RECEIVED GO LD BAR OF 3000 GRAMS FROM OASIS JAIN C REATION . THESE GOLD BARS WERE PURCHASED ON 21 ST AUGUST, 2008 VIDE BILL NO. 56 AND THESE WERE DELI VE RE D TO THE ASSESSEE ON THAT VERY DAY. ASSESS EE HAS SUBMITTED BILL NO. 56 DATED 21 - 08 - 2008. IT ALSO DISCLOSED THAT THE PAYMENT TO M/S. JAIN CREATION WAS MADE THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE. THIS BILL WAS REMAINED TO BE ENTERED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS BEFORE THE DATE OF SURVEY AND THEREFORE CREDIT OF THIS GOLD OUGHT TO BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS CONTENTED THAT THE SOURCE OF GOLD OUGHT TO BE CONSIDERED AS EXPLAINED. IN THIS WAY, ASSESSEE HAS WORKED OUT THE NET EXCESS STOCK AT 2 16 2 .64 GRAMS. LD. AO DID NOT ACCEPT THE CONTENTION OF ASSESSEE ON T HE GROUND THAT DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY , THE DIRECTOR SHRI SHRI VINODBHAI D. SONI WAS SPECIFICALLY ASKED , WHETHER ANY GOLD PURCHASED BY THE COMPANY , WHOSE BILL YET TO BE RECEIV ED IS AVAILABLE IN STOCK OR NOT? HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE ABOUT THIS FACT I.T.A NO. 174 /AHD/20 13 A.Y. 2009 - 10 PAGE NO RADHAKRISHNA GOLD JEWELLARY PVT. LTD VS. JCIT 4 DURIN G THE COURSE OF SURVEY. THEREFORE, WHATEVER EXPLANATION PREPARED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AN AFTERTHOUGHT. ACCORDINGLY, LD. AO HAS REJECTED THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 27,18,000/ - WHICH INCLUDE DISALLOWANCE OF SOME CONVERSION C HARGES. 6. DISSATISFIED WITH THE ADDITION, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A). 7. LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS RE - APPRECIATED THE CONTROVERSY AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 26,68,441/ - . THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALL OWED THE RELIEF TO RS. 49,559/ - WHICH WAS ADDED BY THE AO ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE HAD MADE A CLAIM OF CONVERSION OF GOLD BARS TO 22 CARE T ORNAMENTS. HE DISALLOWED THIS CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. THE FINDING RECORDED BY THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY I N PARA 2.6 IS WORTH TO NOTE WHICH READS AS UNDER: - 2.6 DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS WELL AS APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS THE APPELLANT CONTENDED THAT 3000 GMS OF GOLD WAS RECEIVED FROM M/S. JAIN CREATION BUT THE BILL WAS RECEIVED BEYOND THE DATE OF SURVE Y. THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO FURNISHED COPY OF BILL NO. 56 DATED 21.8.2008 VIDE WHICH M/S. JAIN CREATIONS HAD STATEDL Y SOLD 3000 GMS GOLD TO THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO FURNISHED A CONFIRMATION FROM M/S. JAIN CREATION WHEREIN IT IS AFFIRMED THAT 300 0 GMS GOLD WAS DELIVERED TO THE APPELLANT ON 21.8.2008. AFTER TAKING ENTIRETY OF FACTS I N VIEW, I AM NOT INCLINED TO AGREE WITH THE CONTENTIONS OF THE APPELLANT AS THE APPELLANT HAS NOT STATED THIS FACT BEFORE T HE SURVEY PARTY . IF THE SURVEY PARTY HAS GIV EN CREDIT OF 2500 GMS OF GOLD RECEIVED FROM M/S. OASIS JEWELLS, THE SURVEY PARTY WOULD HAVE GIVEN BENEFIT OF THIS PURCHASE ALSO, HAD THIS FACT BROUGHT TO THEIR NOTICE. IT IS STRANGE THAT THE APPELLANT HAD INFORMED ABOUT ONE PURCHASE BUT FORGOT TO INFORM AB OUT OTHER PURCHASE. THE APPELLANT AND HIS EMPLOYEES WAS HAVING AMPLE TIME TO RECALL THIS TRANSACTION AND THE ENTIRE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND OTHER MATERIAL WAS ALSO AVAILABLE WITH THEM TO WORK OUT THE CORRECT DISCREPANCY. AS PER MARKET PRACTICE THE OWNER OF JE WELLERY SHOPS KNOW THE GOLD PURCHASES MADE IN THE RECENT BY HEART PAST AS THE PUR CHASES ARE MONITORILY BIG. IT WI LL ALSO BE PERTINENT TO MENTION HERE THAT THE I.T.A NO. 174 /AHD/20 13 A.Y. 2009 - 10 PAGE NO RADHAKRISHNA GOLD JEWELLARY PVT. LTD VS. JCIT 5 DELIVERY OF GOLD IS NOT GIVEN WITHOUT ANY DOCUMENTATION. IF THE GOL D WAS RECEIVED BEFORE THE RECE IPT OF BILLS, THE SAME IS FORMALIZED BY WAY OF CHALLAN OR SOME OTHER FORM OF RECEIPT. HOWEVER, DURING THE SURVEY PROCEEDINGS NEITHER THIS CHALLAN WAS FOUND NOR THE APPELLANT HAD BROUGHT PRESENCE OF SUCH DOCUMENT TO THE NOTICE OF SURVEY PARTY. ABSENCE OF SU CH DOCUMENT ONLY STRENGTHENS THE SUSPICION OF AFTERTHOUGHT. SECONDLY, THE APPELLANT HAS NOT INFORMED THE DEPARTMENT ABOUT THIS DISCREPANCY AFTER IT WAS STATEDLY DETECTED. THE SO CALLED DISCREPANCY WAS STATEDLY DETECTED JUST AFTER THE SURVEY AND THE APPELLA NT HAD MADE NECESSARY ENTRIES IN RESPECT OF THESE SO CALLED DISCREPANCIES IN IT'S BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ON 28.8.2008 I.E. JUST NEXT DAY OF SURVEY. 8. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE WHILE IMPUGNING THE ORDERS OF LD. REVENUES AUTHORITIES BELOW CONTENDED T HAT M/S JAIN CREATION HAS SUPPLIED GOLD BARS OF 3000 GRAMS WH ICH REMAINED TO BE ACCOUNTED IN ACCOUNTS . THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED THIS GOLD ON 21 ST AUGUST , 2008. THE GOLD WAS ALSO SUPPLIED ON THAT VERY DAY . I N ORDER TO BUTTRESS HIS CONTENTION, H E DREW O UR ATTENTION TOWARDS PAGES 34 OF THE PAPER BOOK WHERE BILL NO. 56 DATED 21 ST AUGUST, 2008 ISSUED BY M/S JAIN CREATION IS AVAILABLE . LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER CONTENDED THAT M/S JAIN CREATION HAD GIVEN A CONFIRMATION WHICH IS AVAILABLE ON PA GES 33. THE PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE AND THE COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE S BANK IS AVAILABLE ON PAG E NO S . 27 TO 28. ON THE STRENGTH OF THESE DETAILS, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT CREDIT OF 300 0 GRAMS OF THE GOLD OU GH T TO HAVE BEEN GIVEN TO THE ASESSEE. HE ALSO POINTED THAT THOUGH DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY IT WAS CONTENDED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT JEWELLARY OF 2500 GRA M S WAS PURCHASED F R O M M/S OASIS JEWELS WHICH REMAINED TO BE ACCOUNTED. THE CRE DIT OF THIS JEWELLARY HAS BEEN GIVEN BY THE SURVEY PARTY WHILE WORKING OUT THE STOCK , BUT ULTIMATELY , IN THE RETURN ASESSEE HAS RECOGNIZED THE GOLD JEWELL ARY PURCHASED FROM THIS CONCERN AT 1662. 64 GRAMS AND THE EXCESS OF 837 .3 6 GRAMS HAS BEEN OFFERED FOR T AX. IT INDICATES THE BONAFIDE OF THE ASSESSEE I.T.A NO. 174 /AHD/20 13 A.Y. 2009 - 10 PAGE NO RADHAKRISHNA GOLD JEWELLARY PVT. LTD VS. JCIT 6 WHIL E RECONCILING ITS ACCOUNTS WITH REGARD TO TH E PHYSICAL AVAILABILITY OF GOLD AT THE TIME OF SURVEY. IN THIS WAY, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT LD. REVENUES AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION. IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION , HE RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF ITAT MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF CHAWALA PVT. LTD VS. ACIT REPORTED 43 SOT PAGE 651 . 9. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE RELIED UPON THE ORDER S OF REVENU E AUTHORITIES BELOW. HE CONTENDED THAT FULL OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN TO THE MANAGING DIRECTOR AT THE TIME OF SURVEY BUT HE DID NOT UTTER A SINGE WORD WITH RE GARD TO PURCHASE OF JEWELLARY FRO M M/S JAIN CREATION. IT IS A N AFTER THOUGH T AT THE END OF ASSESSEE. LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DREW OUR ATTENTION TOWARDS PARA NO. 2.6 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) S ORDER AND CONTENDED THAT LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS CONSIDERED THIS ASPECT. 10. WE HAVE DULY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AN D GONE THROUGH THE RECORD CAREFULLY . AT THE TIME OF SURVEY , EXCESS STOCK OF GOLD/ORNAMENTS HAVING VALUE OF RS. 85,17,439/ - WAS FOUND AND WORKED OUT. THERE IS NO DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PARTIES ABOUT THE AVAILABILITY OF EXCESS STOCK AT BUSINESS PREMISES. THE DISPUTE RELATES SOURCE OF EXCESS STOCK. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE, DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY , IT WAS CLAIMED THAT JEWELLARY OF 2500 GRAMS WAS RECEIVED FROM OASIS JEWELLERS WHICH REMAINED TO BE ACCOUNTED IN THE STOCK. WHEN ASESSEE FILED THE RETURN, IT C ONTENDED THAT JEWELLARY FROM OASIS JEWELS WAS ACTUALLY RECEIVED AT 16,62 GRAMS AND NOT AT 2500 GRAMS CLAIMED DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY. THU S, THE VALUE REPRESENTING 837.36 GRAMS WAS OFFERED FOR TAX. TO THIS EXTENT, THERE IS NO DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PARTI ES . THE DISPUTE IS , WHETHER CREDIT OF AVAILABILITY OF 3000 GRAMS OF JEWELLARIES ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN PURCHASED FROM M/S I.T.A NO. 174 /AHD/20 13 A.Y. 2009 - 10 PAGE NO RADHAKRISHNA GOLD JEWELLARY PVT. LTD VS. JCIT 7 JAIN CREATION IS TO BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSE OR NOT? SHRI. S.N. DIVETIA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING CONTEN DED THAT IF AN ASSESSEE FAILED TO EXPLAIN A PARTICULAR DISCREPANCY AT THE TIME OF SURVEY, DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE DENUDED FROM HIS RIGHT TO RE - CONCILE THE DISCREPANCY DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING. ACCORDING TO HIM, AT THE TI ME OF SURVEY, PROCESS OF COLLECTING INFORMATION WAS CARRIED OUT . THE ULTIMATE CONCLUSION FROM THOSE INFORMATION HAS TO BE DRAWN AT THE T I M E OF ASSESSMENT STAGE . THEREFORE , IF AN ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED A RE - CONCILIATION SUPPORTING WITH EVIDENCE THE N THAT RE - CONCILIATION CANNOT BRUSHED ASIDE LIGHTLY. WE DO NOT DISPUTE WITH REGARD TO THE PROPOSITION RAISED BY SHRI S.N. DIVETIA, ASSESSEE CAN EXPLAIN THE DISCREPANCY IN THE STOCK AT THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS . THE DISPUTE RELATES TO THE MERIT OF EXPLANATION. THE QUESTION IS, WHETHER EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ACCEPTABLE, WHEN IT IS TO BE EVALUATED IN THE LIGHT OF DIRECT EVID ENCE, CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE AND WITH THE ANGLE OF PROBABILITY. BEFORE WE EMBARK UPON AN INQUIRY WITH REGARD TO THE MATERIAL SUBMIT TED BY THE ASSESSE ALONG WITH ITS EXPLANATION, WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO TAKE NOTE OF THE QUESTION S AND REPLIES OF THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY THE D IRECTOR AT THE TIME OF SURVEY. THE RELEVANT QUESTION S AND REPLIES READ AS UNDER: - QUESTION NO. 13. TODAY IN THE PRINT OF THE ACCOUNTS OF THE COMPUTER OF YOUR COMPANY TOTAL PURCHASE HAVE BEEN SHOWN AS RS. 3,98,55,165/ - SO FAR SUCH PURCHASE YOUR COMPANY IS KEEPING INWARD REGISTER, IF YOU HAVE THAN SHOW IT. AND IF IN YOUR PURCHASE GOODS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AND ONLY SUCH PURCHASE HAVE BEEN MADE FOR WHICH BILL HAS NOT BEEN RECEIVED AND IF BILL RECEIVED AND GOODS HAVE NOT RECEIVED, HOW MANY SUCH PURCHASE ARE THERE, IF ARE THERE, GIVE ITS EVIDENCES. ANSWER 13. IN THE PURCHASE OF MY COMPANY THE PURCHASE BILLS OF OASIS J EWELS PVT. LTD YET TO COME, THE PAYMENT THEREOF HAS BEEN DONE BY CHEQUE, WHEREIN THE BILL OF ABOUT 2.5 KG. GOLD YET TO COME, BUT GOODS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED. AND WHEN THE BILL HAS BEEN RECEIVED AND GOODS IS YET TO I.T.A NO. 174 /AHD/20 13 A.Y. 2009 - 10 PAGE NO RADHAKRISHNA GOLD JEWELLARY PVT. LTD VS. JCIT 8 COME NO SUCH TRANSACTIONS HAVE BEEN DONE. N O INWARD REGISTER KEPT IN MY COMPANY. THE 2.5 KG. GOLD HAS BEEN PURCHASED FROM THE OASIS JEWELS PVT. LTD, NO SUCH CHALLAN IN THAT REGARD LYING WITH ME, BUT THE AFORESAID GOLD HAS BEEN TAKEN FROM THE STOCK OF THE BUSINESS OF MY COMPANY. QUESTION NO. 22 AS PER PRINT GIVEN BY YOU FROM THE COMPUTER OF YOUR COMPANY THE TODAY S DATE CLOSING STOCK IS RS. 1,25,15,266.99/ - WHEREIN IT INCLUDES THE STOCK OF BOTH THE PLACE RATANPOLE AND VASTRAPUR, WHEREIN ON MAKING CALCULATION OF PHYSICAL STOCK, THE TOTAL STOCK RECEI VED OF RS. 2,10,32,705/ - FOR RATANPUR AND VASTRAPUR, FOR THE REASON THEREOF THE COMPANY S EXCESS PHYSICAL STOCK RS. 85,17,439/ - RECEIVED, SO CLARIFY REGARDING SUCH DIFFERENCE. ANSWER 22 IN THE AFORESAID CLOSING STOCK, WHATEVER THE DIFFERENCE OCCURRED, FO R WHICH I DO NOT HAVE ANY CLARIFICATION AND FOR THAT I AM NOT ABLE TO PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCES. THEREFORE, THE SAID AMOUNT OF DIFFERENCE OF RS. 85,17,439/ - WHICH IS THE EXCESS STOCK OF MY COMPANY. THAT HAS BEEN ACQUIRED FROM THE UNACCOUNTED INCOME OF MY COM PANY. FOR THE SAID REASON THE ABOVE AMOUNT, I AM DECLARING IT BEING UNDISCHARGED INVESTMENT IN STOCK AS ADDITIONAL INCOME FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2008 - 09 AND TOWARDS THE AMOUNT OF TAX TO BE PAID OVER IT, I AM WILLINGLY GIVING THREE CHEQUES. 11. THE FIRS T AND THE FOREMOST CIRCUMSTANCE WHICH IS TO BE CONSIDER ED IS THE HUMAN CONDUCT OF THE D IRECTOR AT THE TIME OF SURVEY. 3,000 GRAMS OF THE GOLD IS NOT A SMALL QUANTITY WHICH MIGHT HAVE NOT STRUCK TO THE MIND OF THE DIRECTOR WHEN SURVEY WAS GOING ON. LD. FI RST APPELLATE AUTHORITY , WHILE APPRECIATING THIS ASPECT HA S OBSERVED THAT CONDUCT OF THE D IRECTOR IS LITTLE UNUSUAL WHEN HE BROUGHT TO T HE NOTICE OF JEWELLARY PURCHASE D FROM M/S OASIS J EWELS. IT IS STRANGE THAT THE D IRECTOR INFORMED TO THE ONE PURCHASE BU T FORGET TO INFORM ABOUT OTHER PURCHASE. IT IS ALSO PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT ALL THE STOCKS AS WELL AS OTHER DETAILS WERE B ROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF D IRECTOR. I.T.A NO. 174 /AHD/20 13 A.Y. 2009 - 10 PAGE NO RADHAKRISHNA GOLD JEWELLARY PVT. LTD VS. JCIT 9 THE EMPLOYEES WERE PRESENT AND THEY WERE HAVING AMPLE TIME TO RECALL THIS TRANSACTION . LD. FIRST A PPELLATE AUTHORITY ALSO OBSERVED THAT AS PER MARKET PRACTICE THE OWNER OF JEWELLARY SHOP KNEW THE GOLD PURCHASE MADE IN THE RECENT PAST BY HEART BECAUSE THE PURCHASE IN TERM S OF MONEY IS QUITE BIG. KEEPING IN MIND THIS BACKGROUND, WE HA V E TO APPRECIATE TH E ALLEGED EVIDENCE PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH THE EXPLANATION . THE FIRST IS THE BANK STATE MENT OF VIJAYA BANK. THIS IS THE STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE S ACCOUNT. IN THIS BANK STATEMENT, PAYMENTS TO M/S JAIN CREATION THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQU E AR E AVAILABLE, STARTING FROM 14 TH AUGUST, 18 TH AUGUST, AND 19 TH AUGUST, THESE PAYMENTS WERE OF 42 LACS THEN ON 21 ST AND 23 RD AUGUST, AGAIN ASSESSEE PAID 10 LACS OF RUPEES. IT I S NOT DISCERNABLE AGAINST WHICH PURCHASES THESE PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN GIVEN SET OFF. THE PURCHASES OF THE JEWELRY ON 21 ST AUGUST HAS BEEN ALLEGED TO 35,68 , 000/ - BUT PAYMENTS OF RS. 42 LACS WERE MADE BEFORE 19 TH AUGUST . IF THIS AMOUNT WAS TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR PURCHASE OF T HE JEWELLARY THAN W HAT WAS THE NEED TO MAKE PAYMENT OF RS. 10 LACS MO RE ON 21 ST AND 22 ND AUGUST. THOUGH THE CONFIRMATION IS AVAILABLE AT PAGES 33 GIVEN BY M /S JAIN CREATION DO INDICATE THAT THE GOLD WAS SOLD TO THE ASSESSE AND IT WAS DELIVERED TO THE ASSESSE 21 ST AUGUST, 2008 BUT NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR M/S JAIN CREATION IS ABLE TO SUBSTANTIATE THIS STAND WITH ANY OTHER CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE. TO OUR MIND, THIS EVIDENCE HAS BEEN BROUGHT IN PICTURE BY THE ASSESSE E DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN AN ANTICIPATION THAT CERTAIN PAYMENTS ARE REFLECTING IN THE BAN K ACCOUNT TO M/S. JAIN CREATION, THEREFORE , AN EFFORT SHOULD BE MADE THAT THESE PAYMENTS REPRESENT PURCHAS ES OF GOLD BARS FROM M/S JAIN CREATION. IF IT WAS TRUE STORY THEN IT WOULD NOT HAVE SLIPPED FROM THE MIND OF THE DIRECTOR WHEN HIS STATEMENT WAS RECO RDED. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) HAS RIGHTLY OBSERVED THAT WHILE DELIVERING GOLD AT THE PREMISES OF ASSESSEE, SOMETHING WRITTEN ON PAPER MUST HAVE ACCOMPANIED, BECAUSE I.T.A NO. 174 /AHD/20 13 A.Y. 2009 - 10 PAGE NO RADHAKRISHNA GOLD JEWELLARY PVT. LTD VS. JCIT 10 THAT WOULD INSULATE THE CARRIER FROM ANY I NQUIRY ON THE WAY, IF CAUGHT BY AN Y AGENCY. ON AN ANALYSIS OF THE EVIDENCE AVAILABLE ON RECORD, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS APPRECIATED THE CONTROVERSY IN RIGHT PERSPECTIVE AND NO INTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR IN THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A PPE ALS ). WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THIS APPEAL. IT IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONO UNCE D IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26 - 05 - 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( ANIL CHATURVEDI ) ( RAJPAL YADAV ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 26 /05 /2015 AK / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,