DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SALEM vs. RAVISHANKAR, SALEM

ITA 2626/CHNY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 March 20268 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming the CIT(A)'s decision. It held that the assessee had already offered the difference in stock valuation as business income in their return. The difference arose from adopting a GP ratio to the total valuation, and there was no finding of actual 'excess stock' by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the addition under Section 69B was not justified.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an HUF, declared income of ₹5,88,09,370/-. A survey under Section 133A revealed excess bullion and jewellery valued at ₹3,15,45,968/- compared to recorded books. The Assessing Officer added this amount under Section 69B as unexplained investment. The CIT(A) subsequently deleted this addition, directing it to be treated as business income.

What were the issues?

Whether the difference in stock valuation found during a survey should be assessed as unexplained investment under Section 69B or as business income, given the assessee's own admission to treat it as business income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 133A,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 69A,Section 69B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Ms. Padmavathy, S.

Hearing: 24.02.2026Pronounced: 13.03.2026

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 21.05.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 18, Chennai for the assessment year 2019-20. 2. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 55 days. The DCIT Circle 1, Salem filed a condonation petition for the delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit,

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 133A

All 5,893 judgments and leading authorities on Section 133A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →