PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 6 vs. M/S JANAM STEEL AND ALLOYS

C/TAXAP/1240/2018 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1240 of 2018 ========================================================== PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 6 Versus M/S JANAM STEEL AND ALLOYS ========================================================== Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.N. KARIA Date : 09/10/2018 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) 1. Revenue is in appeal against the judgment of the Income   Tax   Appellate   Tribunal   dated   23.03.2018 raising following question for our consideration: “Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.1,59,22,356/­ due to discrepancy found in stock statements, and by not considering the evidences in form of stock statements which were   submitted   by   the   assessee   to   his banker, Punjab National Bank?” 2. On 08.10.2018, we had considered such a question at the instance of the Revenue in Tax Appeal No.1198 of 2018 making following observations: “ Question [1] pertains to addition of a sum of Rs. 1.59 crores [rounded off] made by the   Assessing   Officer   on   account   of discrepancy in the stock, as per the books of account of the assessee and that shown in the   bank   statements.   Upon   appeal,   CIT   [A] had given substantial relief retaining only Rs.   19.46   lakhs   [rounded   off]   of   such addition,   deleting   the   rest.   In   further appeal,   the   Tribunal   deleted   the   remaining amount also inter alia observing that there Page 1 of 2

C/TAXAP/1240/2018 ORDER was no difference in the physical stock and the   stock   shown   in   the   account   of   the assessee on the date of survey. Sole ground for   making   the   addition   was   difference between   the   accounts   maintained   by   the assessee and the stock statement filed with the   Bank.   It   was   noted   that   the   stock statements   filed   with   the   Bank   pertain   to the months of April to August, whereas, the survey took place in the month of September. It   was   also   noticed   that   the   tendency   to show higher value in the bank statements to enjoy  higher   cash  credit   limit.   The   entire issue   is   thus   based   on   facts   duly appreciated by the CIT [A] and the Tribunal. No question of law arises. Question [2] is nothing but an element of   the   first   question.   No   separate discussion is therefore necessary. Third question pertains to deletion of a sum of Rs. 7.48 Crore added by the Assessing Officer on the strength of entries made in the   diaries   seized   during   the   survey operation.   CIT   [A]   and   the   Tribunal concurrently held that these entries pertain to   one   Shri   Rajesh   P   Patel   and   not   the assessee. The said Rajesh P Patel had also confirmed   this   during   his   examination.   He had   also   filed   an   affidavit   in   support thereof. Such being the position, no question of law arises. In the result, Tax Appeal is dismissed.” 3. In the result, Tax Appeal is dismissed. (AKIL KURESHI, J) (B.N. KARIA, J) ANKIT SHAH Page 2 of 2