ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. JAYANTHILAL INDER CHAND JAIN, CHENNAI

(अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Mr.Bharat Kumar, CA(Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Dr.M.Mohan Babu, Addl.CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 09.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 14.11.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M :

This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA / APL / S / 250 / 2025-26 / 1075918960(1) dated 30.04.2025 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), Chennai-20, for the assessment year 2018-19. The reference to the word “Act” in this order hereinafter shall mean the Income Tax Act, 1961 as amended from time to time. 2.0 At the outset, the Ld.DR from the Revenue informed that the Ld.CIT(A) has given relief to the assessee by placing reliance upon the decision of this tribunal in the case of overseas leathers ITA 962/Chny/2022 dated 05.04.2023. It was submitted that the impugned decision of the tribunal has been contested by the Revenue before the Hon’ble Madras High Court and that therefore the order of Ld.CIT(A) deserves to be overruled. It was submitted that issue under consideration was excess stock of gold found during the survey and consequent addition of Rs.6,59,15,398/- by the Ld.AO to assessee’s total income. The issues at hand involved treatment of excess stock u/s 69B of the Act or as business income. It was vehemently argued that the Revenue has not accepted the findings of this tribunal in the case of overseas leathers supra. 3.0 The Ld.Counsel for the assessee countered the arguments of Ld.DR, submitting that mere filing of appeal would not make the order of this tribunal inoperable. It was argued that the Hon’ble High Court has not given any stay towards appeal of Revenue in the case of overseas leathers supra and therefore the order of this tribunal is presently a good law. 4.0 We have heard the rival submissions in the light of material available on records. It is an admitted fact on record that the facts of present case are identical to those considered by this tribunal in the case Page - 2 - of 4 of overseas leathers supra. It is also an undisputed fact that the decision of this tribunal in the case of overseas leathers supra is in favour of assessee. We concur with the arguments of the Ld.Counsel for the assessee that mere filing of appeal by the Revenue would not defeat the decision pronounced in the case of overseas leathers supra. We have also noted that the Ld.CIT(A) has given relief to the assessee by relying upon the impugned decision of this tribunal in above. Accordingly, in respectful compliance to the said decision as also for the purposes of consistency, we are of the considered view that there is no case for any intervention in the assailed appellate order. We therefore confirm the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss all the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue. 5.0 In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.