IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA SMC BENCH, KOLKATA (BEFORE SRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA NO. 758/KOL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 M/S. POPULAR CASTINGS...........................................................APPELLANT C/O SUBASH AGARWAL & ASSOCIATES SIDDHA GIBSON 1, GIBSON LANE SUITE-213 2 ND FLOOR KOLKATA 700 069 [PAN: AAGFP 6924 J] DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-48, KOLKATA......RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY: SHRI SUBASH AGARWAL, ADVOCATE, APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. SHRI SITAL CHANDRA DAS, ADDL. CIT, D/R. APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : AUGUST 28 TH , 2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : SEPTEMBER 12 TH , 2018 ORDER PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, AM :- THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-14, KOLKATA, (HEREINAFTER THE LD. CIT(A)), DT. 27/03/2018, PASSED U/S 250 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER THE ACT), RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14, ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE DELETED THE ADDITION OF THE ALLEGED EXCESS STOCK OF INVENTORY ALLEGEDLY FOUND AT THE TIME OF SURVEY AMOUNTING TO RS.17,75,402/-. 2. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD FURTHER GROUNDS OF APPEAL OR ALTER THE GROUNDS AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 2. I HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS. ON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, PERUSAL OF THE PAPERS ON RECORD, ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AS WELL AS CASE LAW CITED, I HOLD AS FOLLOWS:- IN THIS CASE, DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY U/S 133A OF THE ACT, ON 18/01/2013, THE VALUATION OF FISCAL STOCK WAS ARRIVED AT RS.38,55,400/-. AN ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE OF THE 2 ITA NO. 758/KOL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 M/S. POPULAR CASTINGS EXCESS STOCK FOUND TO THE TUNE OF RS.17,75,402/- . DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE LD. CIT(A) FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ABLE TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM THAT THE INVENTORY OF STOCK DRAWN UP BY THE SURVEY TEAM AND THE VALUATION THEREOF IS ERRONEOUS. HE FOUND THAT THE INVENTORY STOCK WAS DULY SINGED BY THE ASSESSEE AND CREDENCE OF THE SAME WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BY HIM. IT WAS ONLY AFTER 2 YEARS 10 MONTHS, THAT THE ASSESSEE CHOSE TO PROTEST AGAINST THE VALUATION OF STOCK. HE REJECTED THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION. 3. I DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THIS FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT DEMONSTRATE BEFORE US THAT THE VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK WAS ERRONEOUS. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, I UPHOLD THE CONCURRENT FINDING OF FACTS BY BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND DISMISSED THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. KOLKATA, THE 12 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2018. SD/- [ J. SUDHAKAR REDDY ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 12.09.2018 {SC SPS} 3 ITA NO. 758/KOL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 M/S. POPULAR CASTINGS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S. POPULAR CASTINGS C/O SUBASH AGARWAL & ASSOCIATES SIDDHA GIBSON 1, GIBSON LANE SUITE-213 2 ND FLOOR KOLKATA 700 069 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-48, KOLKATA 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY HEAD OF OFFICE/ D.D.O. ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES