Adarsh Halan, Cuttack V. ITO, Cuttack

ITA 308/CTK/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7581 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 26-10-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Business income
• Section: 43B; 40A(3)

Judgement Text

FIT FOR PUBLICATION IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK SMC BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI N. S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.308 /CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 - 2010 ADARSH HALAN, PROP. M/S. ADITYA IMPEX & TECHNOLOGIES, BISWANATH LANE, CUTTACK. VS. ITO, WARD - 2(4), CUTTACK PAN/GIR NO. AASPH 0140 G (APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI AVINASH KEDIA, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI D.K.PRADHAN , DR DATE OF HEARING : 2 6 /10 / 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26 /10 / 2016 O R D E R THIS I S AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - CUTTACK, DATED 29.1.2015 , FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 2010 . 2. IN GROUND NO.1 OF THE APPEAL, THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.80 ,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF UN - EXPLAINED CASH CREDIT. 2 ITA NO.308/CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009 - 2010 3. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN 14 CREDITORS AGGREGATING TO RS.14,36,291/ - AS UNDER: SL.NO. NAME OF THE CREDITOR AMOUNT 1. ASHIRBAD COMPUTER 61,023 2. ESYS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PVT LTD 3,10,003 3. INFOCARE SOLUTION PVT LTD. 1,70,507 4. NEORETIC INFO. LTD. 68,556 5. PRINTHLINK COMPUTER & COMM 50,075 6. NIGAM COMPUTECH & SERVICES P. LTD. 2,511 7 . SAVEX COMPUTER LTD 1,29,223 8. ESQUARE TECHNOLOGY 38,480 9. GITA TRADING CO. 1,00,946 10. JALAN INFOTECH P:VT LTD. 80,000 11. POWERMAX 1,93,440 12. RASSI PERIPHERAL 95,246 13. TARGOUS TECHNOLOGY 1,14,540 14. TRISTAR SOFTWARE & SOLUTION P.LTD. 21,741 TOTAL: 14,36,291 4. THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO EXPLAIN CREDIT ENTRIES IN RESPECT OF 4 CREDITORS TOTALING TO RS.4,78,558/ - AS UNDER: SL.NO. NAME OF THE CREDITOR AMOUNT 1. ESIS INFORMATION TCH. PVT LTD. 3,10,003 2. ESQUARE TECHNOLOPGY 38,480 3. M/S. PRINT LINK COMPUTER 50,075 4. JALAN INFOTECH 80,000 THEREFORE, HE MADE THE ADDITION OF RS.4,78,558/ - AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S.68 OF THE ACT. 3 ITA NO.308/CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009 - 2010 5. ON APPEAL, LD CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF THREE CREDITORS BUT CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF R S.80,000/ - IN THE N AME OF JALAN INFOTECH PVT LTD A S THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE THE CONFIRMATION FROM THE SAID PARTY. 6. BEFORE ME ALSO, NO CONFIRMATION FROM THE CREDITOR COULD BE FILED FOR THE AMOUNT OUTSTANDING PAYABLE TO JALAN INFOTECH PVT LTD. OF RS.80,000/ - . HENCE, I FIND N O GOOD REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. HENCE, I DISMISS THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 7. IN GROUND NO. 2 OF THE APPEAL, THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,36,030/ - AS SUPPRESSION OF PROFIT . 8. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT MRS KAMNA HALAN, SPOUSE OF THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID RS.8,89,516/ - ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE TO CERTAIN PARTIES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER CALLED FOR THE DETAILS OF LEDGER ACCOUNT OF THE ABOVE PERSONS. THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED L EDGER COPIES OF 10 PERSONS OUT OF 18 PERSONS. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADDED BALANCE AMOUNT PAID TO 8 PERSONS DUE TO NON - SUBMISSION OF CONFIRMATION. 9. BEFORE THE LD CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE FILED LEDGER CONFIRMATION OF 8 PERSONS , THE DETAILS OF WH ICH ARE AS UNDER: 4 ITA NO.308/CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009 - 2010 1) FORTUNE MARKETING : RS.35,800/ - 2) SHRI PRABHUDUTTA ROUTRAY : RS.39,640/ - 3) MR AVDESH SHARMA : RS.33,350/ - 4) MR S.H.NAYAK : RS.32,500/ - 5) MR R.K.MISHRA : RS.34,850/ - 6) MR G.V.RAMESH : RS.37,880/ - 7) S.K.GOEL : RS.32,150/ - 8) AMR AMIT BHARDWAR : RS.25,000 10. LD CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITIES WERE ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT SUBMIT THE DETAILS SUCH AS NAME AND ADDRESS, LEDGER COPIES, CONFIRMATION FROM SAID PERSONS. DURING THE APPELLATE AND RE MAND PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED LEDGER CONFIRMATION FROM 8 PERSONS REGARDING CASH RECEIVED OF RS.2,36,030/ - . LD CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THIS APPEARS TO BE AN AFTERTHOUGHT SINCE SUBSTANTIAL TIME HAS ELAPSED IN BETWEEN AND SUCH KIND OF EVIDENCE I F NOT PRODUCED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS CANNOT BE TAKEN AS AUTHENTIC AT THIS LEVEL. HE, THEREFORE, CONFIRMED THE ADDITION. 11. BEFORE ME, LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE ARGUED THAT THE CONFIRMATION AND LEDGER ACCOUNT, WHICH COULD NOT BE PRODUCED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WERE FILED BEFO RE THE LD CIT(A) AND THE LD CIT (A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN NOT ACCEPTING THE SAME. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE POWER OF THE LD CIT(A) IS CO - TERMINUS WITH THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THAT HE SHOULD HAVE ACCEPTED THE CONFIRMATION OF 8 PERSONS FILED BEFORE HIM AFTER VERIFICATION, AS NO MATERIAL WAS BROUGHT ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT THE CONFIRMATIONS WERE NOT 5 ITA NO.308/CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009 - 2010 GENUINE OR CREDITORS WERE NOT GENUINE, THE DISALLOWANCE COULD NOT BE SUSTAINED IN THE HANDS OF T HE ASSESSEE. 12. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD D.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES. 13. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSING THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD, I FIND THAT THE ADDITION OF RS.2,36,030/ - WAS MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE O N THE GROUND THAT THE CONFIRMATION OF 8 PERSONS COULD NOT BE PRODUCED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE FILE D THE CONFIRMATIONS BEFORE THE LD CIT(A) WHO HAD NOT ACCEPTED THE SAME ON THE GROUND THAT THEY WERE NOT FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. I FIND FORCE IN THE ARGUMENTS OF THE LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE POWER OF THE LD CIT(A) IS CO - TERMINUS WITH THA T OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THAT THE LD CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE ACCEPTED THE CONFIRMATION FILED B Y THE ASSESSEE OF 8 PERSONS TO WHOM RS.2,36,030/ - WAS DUE AND AFTER VERIFICATION DECIDED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. AS NO MATERIAL WAS BROUGHT ON RECORD AFTER V ERIFICATION TO SHOW THAT THE CREDITORS WERE NOT GENUINE OR NO AMOUNT WAS OUTSTANDING AND PAYABLE AT THE END OF THE YEAR BY THE ASSESSEE, I AM OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ADDITION MADE TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT JUSTIFIED . I, THEREFORE, DEL ETE THE ADDITION OF RS.2,36,030/ - AND ALLOW THIS GROUND OF APPEAL. 6 ITA NO.308/CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009 - 2010 14. IN GROUND NO.3 OF THE APPEAL, THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.3,06,196/ - U/S.40A(3) OF THE ACT. 15. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE AR E THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE CASH PAYMENTS EXCEEDING RS.20,000/ - IN A SINGLE DAY TO THE FOLLOWING PERSONS: SR.NO. NAME OF THE PARTY DT. OF PAYMENT VR. NO. AMOUNT(RS.) 1. NIGAM COMPUTECH 5.11.2008 1220 34,000 2. GITA TRADING 15.5.2008 315 50,000 3. TRISTAR SOFTWARE 21.10.2008 1178 122,820 4. IDEAS 30.6.2008 331 60,000 5. IDEAS 17.8.2008 528 30,000 6. RAMNATH INFOTECH 22.11.2008 795 70,000 7. BALAJI SOLUTION LTD. 18.9.2008 630 39,376 TOTAL: 3,06,196 16. SINCE THE PAYMENTS WERE MADE IN VIOLATION IN SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED DEDUCTION AND ADDED RS.3,06,196/ - TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 7 ITA NO.308/CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009 - 2010 17. ON APPEAL, LD CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE GROUND THAT T HE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT IN THREE SUCH INSTANCES CASH WAS PAID WHEN CHEQUES WERE BOUNCED AND IN TWO INSTANCES, CASH WAS PAID AS THE PURCHASES WERE MADE FOR THE FIRST TIME FROM THE PARTIES AND THAT NONE OF SUCH REASONS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE CONFORM TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT READ WITH RULE 6DD OF THE I.T.RULES. 18. BEFORE ME, LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT PAYMENT OF RS.34,000/ - TO NIGAM COMPUTECH , RS.50,000/ - TO GITA TRA DING AND RS.22,820/ - TO TRISTAR SOFTWARE WAS MADE AS THE CHEQUES ISSUED TO THEM WERE BOUNCED DUE TO INSUFFICIENT BALANCE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. HE SUBMITTED THAT PAYMENT OF RS.70,000/ - TO RAMNATH AND RS.39,736/ - TO BALAJI SOLUTION LIMITED WE RE MADE FOR PURCHASE FOR THE FIRST TIME. HE, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY IN THE SAID PAY MENTS AND DEDUCTION SHOULD BE ALLOWED. 19. REGARDING PAYMENT OF RS.60,000/ - AND RS.30, 000/ - TO IDEAS, LD A.R OF THE ASSESSEE AGREED TO T HE ADDITION. 20. LD D.R. CONCUR RED WITH THE SUBMISSION OF LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE THAT CASH PAYMENTS WERE MADE TO THREE PARTIES ON ACCOUNT OF BOUNCING OF CHEQUE AND TWO PA RTIES FOR THE FIRST TIME PURCHASE . 8 ITA NO.308/CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009 - 2010 21 IN THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, I AM OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT AS PER THE FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT, WHERE PAYMENT IS MADE IN CASH IN SUM EXCEEDING RS.20,000/ - BY THE ASSESSEE DUE TO BUSINESS EXIGENCY, THEN NO DISALLOWANCE OF THE SAID AMOUNT COULD BE MADE. I F IND THAT IN THREE INSTANCES, PAYMENTS WERE MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN CASH AS THE CHEQUES ISSUED TO PARTIES BOUNCED ON ACCOUNT OF INSUFFICIENT BALANCE IN THE BANK. FURTHER, IN CASE OF TWO INSTANCES, THE ASSESSEE HAD A DEALING FOR THE FIRST TIME WITH THE PART IES WHO INSISTED FOR PAYMENT IN CASH AND, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAD TO MAKE CASH PAYMENT OF RS.2,16,196/ - .. IN VIEW OF ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, I SUSTAIN THE ADDITION OF RS.90,000/ - AND DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.2,16,196/ - . THIS GROUND IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 22. GROUND NO.4 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A) SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,97,599/ - AS UNDER VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK. 23. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCLOSED RS.56,87, 864/ - AS THE VALUE OF HIS CLOSING INVENTORY AS ON 31.3.2009 BUT DID NOT INCLUDE V A T COMPONENT. SECTION 145A STIPULATES THAT THE VALUATION OF INVENTORY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING THE INCOME CHARGEABLE UNDER THE HEAD PROFIT AND GAINS SHALL BE IN ACCOR DANCE WITH THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING REGULARLY EMPLOYED BY THE ASSESSEE AND FURTHER ADJUSTED TO INCLUDE THE AMOUNT OF ANY TAX, DUTY, CESS OR FEE ACTUALLY 9 ITA NO.308/CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009 - 2010 PAID OR INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE TO BRING THE GOODS TO THE PLACE OF ITS LOCATION AND CONDITION AS ON TH E DATE OF VALUATION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE COMPUTATION EVIDENCING THE VAT . THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE THE SAME. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER CALCULATED THE VAT COMPONENT WHICH HAS NOT BEEN INCLUDED IN THE CLOSING STOCK AMOUNTING TO RS. 1,97,599/ - AND ADDED THE SAME TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 24. ON APPEAL BEFORE THE LD CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT ADDING VAT COMPONENT TO CLOSING STOCK INVENTORY WILL NOT HAVE ANY IMPACT ON THE TRADING ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AS THERE WILL BE NO EFFECT IN THE GROSS PROFIT AS VAT IS COLLECTED FROM THE CUSTOMERS ON BEHALF OF THE VAT AUTHORITIES AND ITS COLLECTION FROM THE CUSTOMERS IS NOT AN ECONOMIC BENEFIT TO THE ASSESSEE. SIMILARLY, THE PAYMENT OF VAT IS NOT TREATE D AS AN EXPENSE IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE VAT PAID ON PURCHASES IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE COST OF PURCHASES. WHERE THE TAX PAID ON INPUTS IS AVAILABLE FOR SET - OFF AGAINST THE TAX PAYABLE ON SALES OR IS REFUNDABLE, IT IS IN THE NATURE OF TAXES RECOVERABLE FROM TAXING AUTHORITIES . THEREFORE, THE VAT COMPONENT WILL NOT FORM PART OF THE COST OF INVENTORY AS THE PURCHASE S AND SALES S SHOWN IN THE TRADING ACCOUNT ARE EXCLUSIVE OF VAT. 25. THE LD CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 10 ITA NO.308/CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009 - 2010 26. BEFORE ME, LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 27. LD D.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES. 28 . I FIND THAT SECTION 145A PROVIDES THAT FOR THE P URPOSES OF COMPUTING BUSINESS INCOME, THE INVENTORIES, PURCHASES AND SALES AS DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REGULAR FOLLOWED SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING SHOULD BE REVALUED SO AS TO INCLUDE ALL DUTIES, TAXES, ETC. INCURRED TO BRING THE GOODS TO ITS LOCATION AS ON THE CLOSE OF THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR. 29. IN THE INSTANT CASE, FIRSTLY I FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ONLY REVALUED THE CLOSING STOCK AND DID NOT REVALUE THE OPENING STOCK, PURCHASES AND SALES ON SIMILAR LINES. THEREFORE, LD CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ABOVE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH WAS NOT IN COMPLETE TUNE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145A OF THE ACT. 30. FURTHER, I FIND THAT THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT OF INDIA (ICAI) IN ITS GUIDANCE NOTE RELATING TO CLAUSE NO.12(B) OF TAX AUDIT REPORT IN RESPECT OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145A AND STATE LEVEL VAT HAS STATED THAT INPUT TAX WHICH IS REFUNDABLE SHOULD NOT BE I NCLUDED IN THE COST OF PURCHASES AND VALUE OF INVENTORIES AND SIMILARLY OUTPUT TAX SHOULD NOT B E INCLUDED IN THE VALUE OF SALES. IN OTHER WORDS, EXCLUSIVE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING IS TO BE FOLLOWED. THE GUIDANCE NOTE GOES ON TO STATE THAT THE ADJUSTMENTS 11 ITA NO.308/CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009 - 2010 ENVISAGED IN SECTION 145A WILL NOT HAVE ANY IMPACT ON THE TRADING ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. IN OTH ER WORDS, BOTH UNDER EXCLUSIVE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING AND INCLUSIVE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING, THE GROSS PROFIT IN TRADING ACCOUNT W ILL REMAIN SAME AND THE NET IMPACT ON PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT IS NIL.. THE ICAI EXPLAINED THE SAME BY GIVING AN ILLUSTRATION THERE IN. 31. I FIND THAT WHEN ADJUSTMENTS ENVISA GED UNDER SECTION 145A IS MADE I N THE OPENING STOCK, PURCHASES AND SALES, THE NET EFFECT WILL BE THAT THERE WILL BE AN AMOUNT ON THE DEBIT SIDE OF THE P&L ACCOUNT WHICH WILL REPRESENT THE AMOUNT OF VAT, CREDIT AV AILED ON CLOSING STOCK. THE SA ME IS BECAUSE UNDER THE VAT LAWS OF STATE, THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO CLAIM CREDIT FOR VAT NOT ONLY IN RESPECT OF GOODS PURCHASED AND SOLD BUT ALSO IN RESPECT OF GOODS PURCHASED AND REMAIN UNSOLD I.E. CLOSING STOCK. THIS VA T INPUT CREDIT AVAILED ON THE UNSOLD CLOSING STOCK IS THOUGH TO BE DEBITED IN TRADING ACCOUNT AND CREDITED IN THE BALANCE SHEET BUT THE SAME IS NOT A SUM PAYABLE WITHIN THE MEANING OF EXPLANATION TO SECTION 43B OF THE ACT. THIS IS BECAUSE THE LIABILITY TO PAY THIS AMOUNT OF VAT WILL BE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE YEAR IN WHICH THE RELATED CLOSING STOCK IS SOLD. HENCE, THIS AMOUNT OF VAT AVAILED ON CLOSING STOCK IS TO BE SHOWN AS A REDUCTION FROM THE VALUE OF CLOSIN G STOCK IN THE BALANCE SHEET S IMILAR TO THE TREATMENT GIVEN TO THE AMOUNT OF CENVAT AVAILED IN RESPECT OF EXCISE DUTY PAID ON UNCONSUMED STOCK OF RAW MATERIALS. 12 ITA NO.308/CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009 - 2010 32. THUS, I FIND MYSELF IN AGREEMENT WITH THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY ICAI IN ITS GUIDELINE NOTES ON TAX AUDIT REPORT THAT THE ADJUSTMENT S MADE UNDER SECTION 145A IN RESPECT OF STATE LEVEL VAT WILL HAVE NO IMPACT EVEN WHEN EXCLUSIVE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING IS FOLLOWED BY THE ASSESSEE. 33. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, I FIND THAT THE ADDITION OF RS.1,97,59 9/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON MERE REVALU ING THE CLOSING STOCK AND NOT REVALUING THE OPENING STOCK, PURCHASES AND SALES IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145A OF THE ACT AND THEREFORE, NOT SUSTAINABLE. I, THEREFORE, DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.1,97,5 9 9/ - AND ALLOW THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 34 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCE D IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26 /10 /2016 IN THE PRESENCE OF PARTIES . SD/ - ( N. S SAINI ) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER CUTTACK; DATED 26 /10 /2016 FIT FOR PUBLICATION ( N.S SAINI ) A CCOUNTANT ME M BER 13 ITA NO.308/CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009 - 2010 B.K.PARIDA, SPS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, ASST.REGISTRAR, ITAT, CUTTACK 1. THE APPELLANT :ADARSH HALAN, PROP. M/S. ADITYA IMPEX & TECHNOLOGIES, BISWANATH LANE, CUTTACK. 2. THE RESPONDENT. ITO, WARD - 2(4), CUTTACK 3. THE CIT(A), CUTTACK 4. CIT , CUTTACK 5. DR, ITAT, CUTTACK 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//