G.Balakrishnan, Erode V. ITO, Erode

ITA 2975/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2624 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 03-02-2016
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 09-12-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A B KOLI
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR ERODE
• Keywords: Deemed to accrue or arise in india

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI , ! ' ! # . $% , & '( BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 2975/MDS/2014 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 G. BALAKRISHNAN, 102, JINNAH STREET, ERODE 638 001. PAN AGDPB6110B APPELLANT) V. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-I(2), ERODE. RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE (ERODE) / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A.B.KOLI, JCIT ! / DATE OF HEARING : 03.02.2016 '# ! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 11.03.2016 ) / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) DATED 14 .11.2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. - - ITA 2975/1 4 2 2. THE FIRST TWO GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE GENERAL IN NATURE AND THE SAME IS NOT PRESSED AT THE TIME O F HEARING. ACCORDINGLY, THEY ARE DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 3. THE NEXT GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS WITH R EGARD TO RECASTING OF TRADING AND PROFITS & LOSS ACCOUNT AND FIXING THE GP RATE AT 6%. 4. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE FRAMING THE ASSESSME NT RECASTED THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT THEREBY RECOMP UTED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM THE BUSINESS AT ` 7,68,383/- AS AGAINST DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE AT ` 7,68,691/-. CONSIDERING THE NATURE OF BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE, THE CIT(APP EALS) HAS GIVEN A DIRECTION THAT GROSS PROFIT RATE TO BE CONS IDERED 6% OF THE TOTAL SALES. BEING SO, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMIT Y IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS). THE SAME IS CONFIRMED AND THIS G ROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 5. THE NEXT GROUND IS WITH REGARD TO ADDITION TO TH E STOCK FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY. 6. DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY U/S.133A OF THE ACT, THE VALUE OF STOCK WAS FOUND AT ` 40,24,630/-. THE ASSESSEE ADMITTED AN AMOUNT OF ` 36,24,630/- IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASST. YEAR - - ITA 2975/1 4 3 2010-11 AND IN RESPECT OF BALANCE OF ` 4 LAKHS, IT WAS STATED THAT A SUM OF ` 1,50,000/- ADMITTED AS INCOME FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2008-09 AND ` 2,50,000/- FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2009-10. HOWEVER, THE AO CONSIDERED THE ENTIRE SUM OF ` 40,24,630/- FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2010-11 ONLY. ON APPEAL, THE CIT(APPEALS) CON FIRMED THE FINDINGS OF THE AO. 7. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL ON RECORD. NOW, THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEES C OUNSEL IS THAT AN AMOUNT OF ` 4 LAKHS TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE ASST. YEARS 2008-09 AND 2009-10 AND ` 36,24,630/- TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2010-11. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT MAINTAINED ANY STOCK REGISTER AND THERE IS NO EVIDE NCE TO SHOW THAT THE AMOUNT OF ` 4 LAKHS IS NOT RELATING TO THE ASST. YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.69 OF THE ACT, IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR IMMEDIATELY THE PRECEDING ASST. YEAR THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE INVESTMENT, WHICH ARE NOT RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, IF ANY, MAINTAINED BY HIM FOR SHOWING THE SOURCE OF INCOME, THE SAME SHALL BE TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED IN VESTMENT. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO NOT OFFERED ANY EXPLANATION A BOUT THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF INVESTMENT BEFORE US. SINCE, THE - - ITA 2975/1 4 4 EXPLANATION OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SATISFAC TORY, IN THE OPINION OF THE AO, THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF ` 40,24,630/- HAS TO BE CONSIDERED AS DEEMED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR SUC H FINANCIAL YEAR, WHICH WAS CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(APPEALS). BEI NG SO, THE ARGUMENT OF THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL THAT THE VALUE O F STOCK OF ` 4 LAKHS HAS TO BE CONSIDERED FOR OTHER THAN THIS ASST . YEAR IS NOT BASED ON ANY CONCRETE EVIDENCE. ACCORDINGLY, WE CO NFIRM THE FINDING OF THE CIT(APPEALS) ON THIS ISSUE AND THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS REJECTED. 8. THE NEXT GROUND IN THIS APPEAL IS WITH REGARD TO ADDITION FOR THE DEBTORS AMOUNTING TO ` 24,98,540/-. THIS GROUND IS DISPOSED, AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED THE ISSUE REGARDING THE ADDITION TOWARDS VALUE OF STOCK IN EARLIER PARA. ACCORDINGL Y, THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS REJECTED. 9. THE NEXT GROUND IS WITH REGARD TO ADDITION OF ` 4,20,260/- TOWARDS CASH FOUND. THE LD. AR DID NOT PRESS THIS GROUND OF APPEAL AND THE SAME IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 10. THE NEXT GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS WITH REGARD TO BUILDING ADVANCE OF ` 1,20,000/-. 11. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT AB LE TO - - ITA 2975/1 4 5 PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE TO SHOW THE SOURCE OF BUILDING ADVANCE OF ` 1,20,000/-. ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND IS REJECTED. 12. THE NEXT GROUND IS WITH REGARD TO CASH DEPOSIT OF ` 2 LAKHS INTO THE BANK. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD. AR DID NOT PRESS THIS GROUND OF APPEAL ALSO. ACCORDINGLY, THE SAME IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 13. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DI SMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON FRIDAY, THE 11 TH OF MARCH, 2016 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( $ % . & '( ) ( ) * + , ) DUVVURU RL REDDY - ./012304556037- 8 9: /JUDICIAL MEMBER ! 9:;<<5=1>01>?@AB@3 )8 /CHENNAI, C9 /DATED, THE 11 TH MARCH, 2016. MPO* 9D EFGF /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. H- /CIT(A) 4. H /CIT 5. FIJ K /DR 6. J(L /GF.