Vivekananda Modern Industries , Burdwan V. A.C.I.T.,Circle-2, Burdwan

ITA 2245/KOL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5425 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 08-09-2021
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 01-10-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 131; 142(1); 133A; 205; 250; 143(2); 20

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA A BENCH, KOLKATA {VIRTUAL COURT HEARING} (BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH BORAD, HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA NO. 2245/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16 VIVEKANANDA MODERN INDUSTRIES.............................................................APPELLANT VILL. & P.O. BHANDERDIHI DIST. BURDWAN PINCODE 713 426 [PAN : AAEFV 0133 H] VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOLKATA......................RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY: SHRI AMIT AGARWAL, ADVOCATE, APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. SHRI SUPRIYO PAL, ADDL. CIT, D/R, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : SEPTEMBER 8 TH , 2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : SEPTEMBER 17 TH , 2021 ORDER PER MANISH BORAD, AM :- THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - BURDWAN, (HEREINAFTER THE LD. CIT(A)), DT. 01/08/2019, PASSED U/S 250 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT). 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE AS CULLED OUT FROM THE RECORDS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF RICE MILLS. SURVEY U/S 133A OF THE ACT WAS CONDUCTED AT THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF THE FIRM ON 28/01/2015. EXCESS STOCK WAS FOUND BY THE SURVEY TEAM. PARTNER OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM, MR. DEBKUMAR HAZRA, IN HIS STATEMENT RECORDED ON 20/01/2015, U/S 131 OF THE ACT AGREED THAT THERE IS DISCREPANCY OF EXCESS STOCK OF RS.32,51,736/-. THE EXCESS STOCK FOUND BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES OF RS. 32,51,736/-, WAS COMPUTED IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER:- 2.1. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSEE FILED E-RETURN ON 09/09/2015 SHOWING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.52,45,930/-. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR COMPULSORY ITEMS PHYSICAL VERIFICATION IN QTLS AS PER BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IN QLTS EXCESS QUANTITY UNEARTHED RATE PER QTL VALUE OF UNDISCLOSED STOCK PADDY 7,022 5612 1410 1560 2200224 RICE 1207 775 432 2316 1000512 BRAN 205 171 34 1500 51000 TOTAL 3251736 SCRUTINY UNDER CASS FOLLOWED BY SERVICE OF NOTICE U/S 143(2) & 142(1) OF THE ACT. WHILE EXAMINING THE INCOME TAX RETURN OF LD. ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ALLEGED EXCESS STOCK REITERATED IN THE ITR AND THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY THE UNDISCLOSED STOCK WAS NOT OFFERED TO TAX. THE ASSESSEE GAVE THE FOLLOWING REPLY:- REGARDING EXCESS STOCK FOUND IN SURVEY, IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE FIGURES OF DIFFERENT ITEMS ON THE BASIS OF PHYSICAL VERIFICATION IS QUESTIONABLE ON THE ACCOUNT OF SOLITAIRES REASON T FIGURES WERE TAKEN ON THE BASIS OF PHYSICAL COUNTING OF STOCK NOT ON THE BASIS OF ACTUAL MEASUREMENT BY KANTA AS DONE BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS PRACTICAL AND ACTUAL. THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE STAND BY THE FIGURES OF STOCK AS DISCLOSED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT DURING SURVEY DATE. MOREOVER, THE PHYSICAL VERIFICATION FIGURES OF DIFFERENT ITEMS ARE BASED ON PURE ESTIMATION AND ON SURMISE FOR THE AFORESAID REASON. THEREFORE QUESTION OF UNACCOUNTED OR AT ALL. APART FROM SAID FACTS, THE STATEMENT OF THE PARTN VALUE U/S 133(A), SO ASSESSEE DENIES THE ADMISSION. 2.1.1. THEREAFTER, THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER MADE DETAILED DISCUSSION IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ABOUT THE CALCULATION OF EXCESS STOCK AND MADE THE ADDITION FOR UNDISC LOSED STOCK AT RS.55,45,820/ INVESTMENT IN CLOSING STOCK AT RS.66,00,369/ THE ASSESSEE AT RS.1,73,92,118/ 3. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND PARTLY SUCCEEDED. THE LD. CIT(A) INVESTMENT IN CLOSING STOCK AND FURTHER GAVE RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE BY SUSTAINING THE ADDITION FOR UNDISCLOSED STOCK FOUND DURING SURVEY ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF RS.32,51,736/ 4. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL ADDITION OF RS.32,51,736/ 5. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO REBUT THE FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE ADDITION FOR UNDISCLOSED STOCK TOWARDS RICE OF AN AM OUNT OF RS.10,00,512/ FURTHER WITH REGARD TO THE EXCESS STOCK OF PADDY, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THERE WERE CERTAIN BILLS OF PURCHASE OF PADDY WHICH REMAINED UNACCOUNTED IN THE BOOKS. THOUGH BILLS WERE RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE DATE OF SURVEY BUT ENTRY OF THESE PURCHASES COULD NOT BE RECORDED BEFORE THE DATE OF SURVEY. THE TOTAL OF SUCH PURCHASES 2 SCRUTINY UNDER CASS FOLLOWED BY SERVICE OF NOTICE U/S 143(2) & 142(1) OF THE ACT. WHILE EXAMINING THE INCOME TAX RETURN OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ALLEGED EXCESS STOCK REITERATED IN THE ITR AND THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY THE UNDISCLOSED STOCK WAS NOT OFFERED TO TAX. THE ASSESSEE GAVE THE FOLLOWING STOCK FOUND IN SURVEY, IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE FIGURES OF DIFFERENT ITEMS ON THE BASIS OF PHYSICAL VERIFICATION IS QUESTIONABLE ON THE ACCOUNT OF SOLITAIRES REASON T ON THE BASIS OF PHYSICAL COUNTING OF STOCK NOT ON THE BASIS OF ACTUAL MEASUREMENT BY KANTA AS DONE BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS PRACTICAL AND ACTUAL. THEREFORE THE FIGURES OF STOCK AS DISCLOSED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT DURING SURVEY DATE. MOREOVER, THE PHYSICAL VERIFICATION FIGURES OF DIFFERENT ITEMS ARE BASED ON PURE ESTIMATION AND ON SURMISE FOR THE AFORESAID REASON. THEREFORE QUESTION OF UNACCOUNTED OR EXCESS STOCK DOES NOT ARISE AT ALL. APART FROM SAID FACTS, THE STATEMENT OF THE PARTN ERS DEB KUMAR HAZRA HAS NO EVIDENTIARY VALUE U/S 133(A), SO ASSESSEE DENIES THE ADMISSION. THEREAFTER, THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER MADE DETAILED DISCUSSION IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ABOUT THE CALCULATION OF EXCESS STOCK AND MADE THE LOSED STOCK AT RS.55,45,820/ - AND UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN CLOSING STOCK AT RS.66,00,369/ - AND ASSESSED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS.1,73,92,118/ - 3. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND PARTLY SUCCEEDED. THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN CLOSING STOCK AND FURTHER GAVE RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE BY SUSTAINING THE ADDITION FOR UNDISCLOSED STOCK FOUND DURING SURVEY ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF RS.32,51,736/ -. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL CHALLENGING THE ADDITION OF RS.32,51,736/ - CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A). AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO REBUT THE FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE ADDITION FOR UNDISCLOSED STOCK OUNT OF RS.10,00,512/ - AND BRAN AT RS.51,000/ FURTHER WITH REGARD TO THE BALANCE ADDITION OF RS.22,00,224/ EXCESS STOCK OF PADDY, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THERE WERE CERTAIN BILLS OF PURCHASE OF PADDY WHICH REMAINED UNACCOUNTED IN THE BOOKS. THOUGH BILLS WERE RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE DATE OF SURVEY BUT ENTRY OF THESE PURCHASES COULD NOT BE RECORDED BEFORE THE DATE OF SURVEY. THE TOTAL OF SUCH PURCHASES ITA NO. 2245/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16 VIVEKANANDA MODERN INDUSTRIES SCRUTINY UNDER CASS FOLLOWED BY SERVICE OF NOTICE U/S 143(2) & 142(1) OF THE THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ALLEGED EXCESS STOCK WAS NOT REITERATED IN THE ITR AND THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY THE UNDISCLOSED STOCK WAS NOT OFFERED TO TAX. THE ASSESSEE GAVE THE FOLLOWING STOCK FOUND IN SURVEY, IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE FIGURES OF DIFFERENT ITEMS ON THE BASIS OF PHYSICAL VERIFICATION IS QUESTIONABLE ON THE ACCOUNT OF SOLITAIRES REASON T HAT THE SAID ON THE BASIS OF PHYSICAL COUNTING OF STOCK NOT ON THE BASIS OF ACTUAL MEASUREMENT BY KANTA AS DONE BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS PRACTICAL AND ACTUAL. THEREFORE THE FIGURES OF STOCK AS DISCLOSED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT DURING SURVEY DATE. MOREOVER, THE PHYSICAL VERIFICATION FIGURES OF DIFFERENT ITEMS ARE BASED ON PURE ESTIMATION AND ON STOCK DOES NOT ARISE ERS DEB KUMAR HAZRA HAS NO EVIDENTIARY THEREAFTER, THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER MADE DETAILED DISCUSSION IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ABOUT THE CALCULATION OF EXCESS STOCK AND MADE THE AND UNDISCLOSED AND ASSESSED THE INCOME OF 3. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND PARTLY DELETED THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN CLOSING STOCK AND FURTHER GAVE RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE BY SUSTAINING THE ADDITION FOR UNDISCLOSED STOCK FOUND DURING SURVEY ONLY TO BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL CHALLENGING THE AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO REBUT THE FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE ADDITION FOR UNDISCLOSED STOCK AND BRAN AT RS.51,000/ -. OF RS.22,00,224/ - TOWARDS EXCESS STOCK OF PADDY, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THERE WERE CERTAIN BILLS OF PURCHASE OF PADDY WHICH REMAINED UNACCOUNTED IN THE BOOKS. THOUGH THE BILLS WERE RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE DATE OF SURVEY BUT ENTRY OF THESE PURCHASES COULD NOT BE RECORDED BEFORE THE DATE OF SURVEY. THE TOTAL OF SUCH PURCHASES AMOUNT TO RS.19,52,000/ THE PAPER BOOKS). P RAYER VERIFY THE GENUINENESS OF THESE BILLS OF PURCHASES OF PADDY AND IF FOUND CORRECT, NECESSARY RELIEF MAY BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO MADE A SUBMISSION THAT THE ADDITION SHOULD ONLY BE R ESTRICTED TO THE PROFIT ELEMENT STOCK. 6. PER CONTRA THE LD. D/R VEHEMENTLY ARGUED BY SUPPORTING THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 7. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIA ON RECORD. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN GROUND NOS. 1 TO 3 PERTAIN TO THE ADDITION OF RS.32,51,736/ ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF EXCESS STOCK FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY U/S 133A OF THE ACT. THE EXCESS STOCK PERTAINS TO THE FOLLOWING THREE ITEMS:- 7.1. AS REGARDS THE EXCESS STOCK OF PADDY OF RS.22,00,224/ COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS RS.19,52,500/- WERE NOT RECORDED IN THE BOOKS THOUGHT THE PURCHASES WERE MADE PRIOR TO THE DATE OF SURVEY. THIS BEING ADDITION PLACED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES, NEEDS TO BE EXAMINED AT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. WE ACCORDINGLY DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY THE GENUINENESS OF THE EIGHT BILLS PLACED AT PAGES 16 TO 23 OF THE PAPER BOOKS TOTALING TO RS.19,52,500/ OF PADDY AND AF TER GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AND AFTER MAKING NECESSARY VERIFICATION IF THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS FOUND TO BE CORRECT THEN THE RELIEF SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO THIS EXTENT. THUS, THE ISSUE OF ADDITION OF STATISTICAL PURPOSES AS PER PADDY RICE BRAN TOTAL 3 AMOUNT TO RS.19,52,000/ - (COPIES OF THE BILLS ARE PLACED AT PAGES 16 TO 23 OF RAYER WAS MADE FOR DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY THE GENUINENESS OF THESE BILLS OF PURCHASES OF PADDY AND IF FOUND RELIEF MAY BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE MADE A SUBMISSION THAT THE ADDITION ON THE EXCESS STOCK ESTRICTED TO THE PROFIT ELEMENT AND NOT THE TOTAL VALUE OF THE LD. D/R VEHEMENTLY ARGUED BY SUPPORTING THE ORDERS OF WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIA ON RECORD. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN GROUND NOS. 1 TO 3 PERTAIN TO THE ADDITION OF RS.32,51,736/ - CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AS MADE BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF EXCESS STOCK FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF THE ACT. THE EXCESS STOCK PERTAINS TO THE FOLLOWING THREE AS REGARDS THE EXCESS STOCK OF PADDY OF RS.22,00,224/ COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE A REQUEST THAT FEW BILLS AMOUNTING TO WERE NOT RECORDED IN THE BOOKS THOUGHT THE PURCHASES WERE MADE PRIOR TO THE DATE OF SURVEY. THIS BEING ADDITION AL EVIDENCE WHICH WERE PLACED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES, NEEDS TO BE EXAMINED AT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. WE ACCORDINGLY DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY THE GENUINENESS OF THE EIGHT BILLS PLACED AT PAGES 16 TO 23 OF THE PAPER BOOKS TOTALING TO RS.19,52,500/ - RELATING TO PURCHASE TER GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AND AFTER MAKING NECESSARY VERIFICATION IF THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS FOUND TO BE CORRECT THEN THE RELIEF SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO THIS EXTENT. THUS, OF EXCESS STOCK OF RS.19,52,500/- AS PER TERMS OF THE DIRECTIONS INDICATED HEREINABOVE. RS.22,00,224/- RS.10,00,512/- RS.51,000/- RS.32,51,736/- ITA NO. 2245/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16 VIVEKANANDA MODERN INDUSTRIES (COPIES OF THE BILLS ARE PLACED AT PAGES 16 TO 23 OF WAS MADE FOR DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY THE GENUINENESS OF THESE BILLS OF PURCHASES OF PADDY AND IF FOUND RELIEF MAY BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ON THE EXCESS STOCK AND NOT THE TOTAL VALUE OF THE LD. D/R VEHEMENTLY ARGUED BY SUPPORTING THE ORDERS OF WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIA LS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN GROUND NOS. 1 TO 3 PERTAIN TO THE CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AS MADE BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF EXCESS STOCK FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF THE ACT. THE EXCESS STOCK PERTAINS TO THE FOLLOWING THREE AS REGARDS THE EXCESS STOCK OF PADDY OF RS.22,00,224/ -, THE LD. MADE A REQUEST THAT FEW BILLS AMOUNTING TO WERE NOT RECORDED IN THE BOOKS THOUGHT THE PURCHASES WERE AL EVIDENCE WHICH WERE PLACED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES, NEEDS TO BE EXAMINED AT THE LEVEL OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. WE ACCORDINGLY DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY THE GENUINENESS OF THE EIGHT BILLS PLACED AT PAGES RELATING TO PURCHASE TER GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AND AFTER MAKING NECESSARY VERIFICATION IF THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS FOUND TO BE CORRECT THEN THE RELIEF SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO THIS EXTENT. THUS, IS ALLOWED FOR TERMS OF THE DIRECTIONS INDICATED HEREINABOVE. 7.2. AS REGARDS EXCESS STOCK OF RICE AND BRAN, OF RS.10,00,512 & RS.51,000/- RESPECTIVELY, THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THAT ONLY THE GROSS PROFIT ELEMENT SHOULD BE ADDED IN VIEW OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF IN [2018] 96 TAXMANN.COM 286 (CALCUTTA) ASSESSEE MISERABLY FAILED TO SHOW THAT THE FACTS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE SIMILAR TO THE FACTS ADJUDICATED BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AND, THEREFORE, THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SUBARNA RICE MILL (SUPRA) APPEAL. FURTHER THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO CONTROVERT THE FACT THAT EXCESS STOCK OF PADDY OF RS. RS.19,52,500/-] , RICE OF RS.10,00,512/ UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT ARISING OUT OF ACCUMULATED UNDISCLOSED INCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE PAST TAX. 7. UNDER THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE CONFIRM THE ADDITION OF RS.12,99,236/- T OWARDS EXCESS STOCK FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH WHICH REMAINED UNEXPLAINED AT THE END OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NOS. 1 TO 3 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. GROUND NO. 4 IS GENERAL IN NATURE. 9. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. KOLKATA, THE SD/- [ ABY T. VARKEY ] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 17.09.2021 {SC SPS} 4 AS REGARDS EXCESS STOCK OF RICE AND BRAN, OF RS.10,00,512 & RESPECTIVELY, THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THAT ONLY THE SHOULD BE ADDED IN VIEW OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PCIT VS. SUBARNA RICE MILL [2018] 96 TAXMANN.COM 286 (CALCUTTA) , HOWEVER, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE MISERABLY FAILED TO SHOW THAT THE FACTS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE SIMILAR TO THE FACTS ADJUDICATED BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AND, THEREFORE, THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE SUBARNA RICE MILL (SUPRA) CANNOT BE APPLIED ON THE ISSUE UNDER APPEAL. FURTHER THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO CONTROVERT THE FACT THAT EXCESS STOCK OF PADDY OF RS. 2,47,724/- [22,00,224/ , RICE OF RS.10,00,512/ - AND BRA N OF RS.51,000/ UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT ARISING OUT OF ACCUMULATED UNDISCLOSED INCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE PAST AND CURRENT YEAR WHICH UNDER THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE CONFIRM THE ADDITION OF OWARDS EXCESS STOCK FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH WHICH REMAINED UNEXPLAINED AT THE END OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NOS. 1 TO 3 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. GROUND NO. 4 IS GENERAL IN NATURE. THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. KOLKATA, THE 17 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER , 20 [ MANISH BORAD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2245/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16 VIVEKANANDA MODERN INDUSTRIES AS REGARDS EXCESS STOCK OF RICE AND BRAN, OF RS.10,00,512 & RESPECTIVELY, THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THAT ONLY THE SHOULD BE ADDED IN VIEW OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE PCIT VS. SUBARNA RICE MILL REPORTED THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE MISERABLY FAILED TO SHOW THAT THE FACTS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE SIMILAR TO THE FACTS ADJUDICATED BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AND, THEREFORE, THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CANNOT BE APPLIED ON THE ISSUE UNDER APPEAL. FURTHER THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO CONTROVERT THE FACT [22,00,224/ - LESS N OF RS.51,000/ - IS AN UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT ARISING OUT OF ACCUMULATED UNDISCLOSED INCOME WHICH IS NOT OFFERED TO UNDER THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE CONFIRM THE ADDITION OF OWARDS EXCESS STOCK FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH WHICH REMAINED UNEXPLAINED AT THE END OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NOS. 1 TO 3 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. , 20 21. SD/- MANISH BORAD ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIVEKANANDA MODERN INDUSTRIES VILL. & P.O. BHANDERDIHI DIST. BURDWAN PINCODE 713 426 2. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. 5 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: VIVEKANANDA MODERN INDUSTRIES ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2, KOLKATA 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES ITA NO. 2245/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16 VIVEKANANDA MODERN INDUSTRIES TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /DDO ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES