DCIT CIRCLE-2(1), GWALIOR vs. GDP AGRO & FOOD, GWALIOR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 346/AGR/2017Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 April 2025AY 2012-13Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the seized notebook contained mere offers for purchases, and accepted offers were recorded in the regular books of accounts. This was corroborated by broker affidavits, and the Assessing Officer accepted that a significant portion of purchases were recorded.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an order deleting additions made on account of unaccounted purchases and stock-in-trade, which were based on a survey. The Assessing Officer estimated profit on unaccounted purchases and added the value of unexplained closing stock.

What were the issues?

Whether additions on account of unaccounted purchases and stock-in-trade are justified when accepted offers were recorded in regular books and corroborated by evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” BENCH, AGRA

Before: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

Pronounced: 22.04.2025

(िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year:2012-13) DCIT, Circle 2(1), GDP Agro & Food Products Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Gwalior. Ward No. 54, Gudagudi ka Naka, Vs. Bajriya, Lashkar, Gwalior (MP) �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAECG-1517-G (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Sh. Deependra Mohan, CA – Ld. AR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 19-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appealby revenue for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 arises out of an order passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Gwalior [CIT(A)] on 08-05-2017 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 28-03-2015. Both sides made vehement arguments. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, the appeal is disposed-off as under. The sole grievance of the revenue is profit addition on unaccounted purchases and unexplained stock-in-trade. The assessee is stated to be engaged in processing and trading of sesame seeds. The assessee was subjected to survey u/s 133A on 15-01-2015 which form the basis of assessment.

2.

The loose papers indicated unaccounted purchases for Rs.37.41 Crores. The Ld. AO estimated profit of Rs.8.65% on the same and made addition of Rs.323.61 Lacs. The Ld. AO also estimated unaccounted closing stock against the same for Rs.151.82 Lacs and further added the same to the income of the assessee.

3.

During first appeal, the assessee’ submissions were subjected to remand proceedings. Based on the same, Ld. CIT(A), in para 5.1.3, noted that note books as seized vide Annexure B-7 contained offers for purchase. The offers which are accepted are recorded in the regular books of accounts. The Ld. AO accepted the fact that the purchases for Rs.11.07 Crores were found recorded in regular books of accounts. This fact was supported by affidavit of some of the brokers confirming the above facts. In fact, one broker was summoned who had given affidavit on oath. Considering all these facts, Ld. CIT(A) deleted impugned additions against which the revenue is in further appeal before us.

4.

The Ld. CIT(A) has rendered factual finding that the seized notebook contained mere offers for purchases. The offers which were accepted were found recorded in the regular books of accounts. The Ld. AO accepted the fact that the purchases for Rs.11.07 Crores were found recorded in regular books of accounts. This fact stood corroborated by the affidavit of brokers. This position remains uncontroverted before us. There is no other corroborative evidence supporting the conclusion of Ld. AO. This being so, no interference is required in the impugned order.

5.

The appeal stands dismissed.

Order pronounced u/r 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →