Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI N.R.S.GANESAN & SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY
आदेश / O R D E R
PER A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal is filed by the Assessee, aggrieved by the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(A)-3, Coimbatore dated 10.03.2015 in passed under Sec.143(3) read with section Sec. 250 of the Act.
The Assessee has raised eleven elaborate grounds in its appeal, however the crux of the issue is that:- i) The Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of `64,53.811/- made by the Ld. Assessing Officer as “unaccounted sales” of meat, tabled eggs and male parents.
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of running an integrate poultry farm like breeder farm, hatchery, feed mill, growing of broilers etc. The case was taken up for scrutiny and finally the assessment was completed on 15.02.2014 wherein the Ld. Assessing Officer added `64,53,811/- to the income of the assessee as unaccounted sales. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was noticed by the Ld. Assessing Officer that there were discrepancies in the stock. It is also mentioned by the Ld. Assessing Officer in his order that the assessee had admitted unaccounted sales. Further it was observed that the assessee was not maintaining stock records properly. The assessee also failed to produce the stock register before the Ld. Assessing Officer.
Therefore, analyzing the stock from the available materials on record, the Ld. Assessing Officer arrived at a conclusion that the assessee had made unaccounted sales for `64,53,811/- and therefore added the same to the income of the assessee.
On appeal, the Ld. CIT (A) accepting the computation of the Ld. Assessing Officer confirmed his order, aggrieved by which the assessee is now on appeal before us.
At the outset the Ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee has been maintaining proper books with respect to stock and the observations of the Ld. Assessing Officer that the assessee has not produced stock register before the Ld. Assessing Officer is incorrect.
The Ld. A.R. further argued stating that the matter may be remitted back to the file of Ld. Assessing Officer for denovo consideration. The Ld. D.R vehemently opposed to the submissions of the Ld. A.R. and argued by stating that the assessee was not maintaining proper stock record and therefore the Revenue was left out with no other option but to compute the unexplained sales based on the available materials on record. However, he magnanimously agreed for remitting back the matter to the file of Ld. Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.
We have heard both the parties and carefully perused the materials available on record. The Ld. A.R. has affirmed before us that the assessee had been maintaining proper stock records and the stock book was very much available with the assessee. Therefore in the interest of justice, we hereby remit the matter back to the file of Ld. Assessing Officer for denovo consideration. We also hereby direct the assessee to produce all the relevant documents, stock records, stock books and books of accounts, etc., before the Ld. Assessing Officer promptly and co-operate with the Revenue in their proceedings in order to expedite their orders. We also make it clear that if the assessee fails to produce the relevant documents required by the Revenue, then the Revenue shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law and merits based on the materials available on record, however after affording sufficient opportunity to the assessee of being heard.
In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above.
Order pronounced on the 22nd December, 2015 at Chennai.