ITO, WD-WD-43(4), KOLKATA, Kolkata v. M/s Super Diesel, Kolkata

ITA 1294/KOL/2015 | 2011-2012
Pronouncement Date: 29-11-2017 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 129423514 RSA 2015
Assessee PAN AAMFS0816J
Bench Kolkata
Appeal Number ITA 1294/KOL/2015
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 15 day(s)
Appellant ITO, WD-WD-43(4), KOLKATA, Kolkata
Respondent M/s Super Diesel, Kolkata
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 29-11-2017
Appeal Filed By Department
Tags No record found
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 29-11-2017
Last Hearing Date 18-09-2017
First Hearing Date 18-09-2017
Assessment Year 2011-2012
Appeal Filed On 14-10-2015
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH : KOLKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SHRI M.BALAGANESH AM & SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI JM] I.T.A NO. 1294/KOL/20 15 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-1 2 ITO WD-43(4) KOLKATA -VS- M/S SUPER D IESEL [PAN: AAMFS 0816 J] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT : SHRI ARINDAM BHATT ACHARJEE ADDL. CIT FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI MANISH TIWARI FCA DATE OF HEARING : 14.11.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29.11.2017 ORDER PER M.BALAGANESH AM 1. THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE ARISES OUT OF THE OR DER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-13 KOLKATA [IN SHORT THE LD CI T(A)] IN APPEAL NO.43/CIT(A)- 13/CIR-43/2014-15/KOL DATED 27.08.2015 AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ACIT CIRCLE- 42 KOLKATA [ IN SHORT THE LD AO] UNDER SECTION 14 3(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) DATED 31.03.2014 FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2011-12. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE TO BE DECIDED IN THIS APPEAL IS A S TO WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 60 48 455 /- U/S 69B OF THE ACT WITHOUT CALLING FOR THE REMAND REPORT FROM THE LD. AO IN CONTRAVENT ION OF PROVISION OF RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2 ITA NO.1294/KOL/2015 M/S SUPER DIESEL A.YR.2011-12 2 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THIS ISSUE IS THAT THE ASSESS EE IS A DEALER IN AUTO PARTS AND ALSO RUNS A SERVICING OF MOTOR VEHICLES WORK SHOP. THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 WAS FILED ON 28.09.2011 DECLARING TOTAL INC OME OF RS. 29 99 088/-. A SURVEY WAS CONDUCTED IN THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF THE ASSES SEE ON 11.02.2011 AND EXCESS STOCK TO THE TUNE OF RS. 61 48 455/- WAS FOUND WHICH WAS SURRENDERED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ADVANCE TAX WAS ALSO AGREED TO BE PAID FOR THE SAME . THE LD. AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO PAID THE TAXES DUE THEREON. THE L D. AO OBSERVED THAT AT THE TIME OF SURVEY STATEMENT OF SHRI YASWINDER SINGH PARTNER OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM WAS RECORDED WHO IN REPLY TO QUESTION NO. 4 AND 5 ADMITTED THA T QUANTITY AND VALUE OF STOCK FOUND BY THE SURVEY TEAM AS GENUINE AND TRUE. HOWEVER WHILE FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME THE ASSESSEE FIRM RETRACTED FROM THE SURRENDER MADE AT THE TIME OF THE SURVEY AND VALUE OF CLOSING STOCK WAS SHOWN AT RS. 69 18 764/-. WHEN TH IS DISCREPANCY WAS CONFRONTED ON THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEE DINGS BY THE LD. AO. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED A DETAILED CHART OF THE WORK ING OF CLOSING STOCK AS REFLECTED IN THE TRADING ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. AO OBSERVE D THAT THE ASSESSEE VIDE HIS AR LETTER DATED 06.03.2014 AGREED FOR VALUATION OF STO CK MADE AT THE TIME OF SURVEY. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE PRAYED FOR CERTAIN CONCESSIO NS ON ACCOUNT OF PRICE DIFFERENCE OWING TO INCLUSION OF VAT IN CERTAIN ITEMS AND ALSO CLAIMED THE SOME OF THE STOCKS TO BE NUMBER OF REPLACEMENTS WARRANTED/GOODS RETURNED ETC. THE LD. AR WAS ASKED TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIM FOR THE SAME. THE LD. AO OBS ERVED THAT BARRING THE ISSUE OF DIFFERENCE IN RATE NO OTHER CLAIM FOR CONCESSION WAS FOUND TENABLE. ACCORDINGLY HE GRANTED DEDUCTION OF RS. 1 000/- ON ACCOUNT OF VAT AND MADE ADDITION OF RS. 60 48 455/- TOWARDS EXCESS VALUE OF STOCK AS UNEXPL AINED U/S 69B OF THE ACT. 4. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED TH AT THE SURVEY TEAM VALUED THE STOCK AT RS. 89 95 004/- AND PREPARED AN ACCOUNTS TO WORK OUT VALUE OF STOCK AS PER BOOKS AT RS. 28 46 549/- ON 11.02.2011 (BEING THE DATE OF SU RVEY) THEREBY RESULTING IN EXCESS STOCK OF RS. 60 48 455/-. THE ASSESSEE WAS FORCED T O MAKE COMMITMENT TO PAY ADVANCE 3 ITA NO.1294/KOL/2015 M/S SUPER DIESEL A.YR.2011-12 3 TAX ON SO-CALLED EXCESS STOCK. THE SAID STATEMENT R EGARDING EXCESS STOCK WAS RETRACTED BY THE ASSESSEE LATER ON. THE AUDITED ACCOUNTS ENCL OSED ALONG WITH RETURN OF INCOME CONTAINS CLOSING STOCK OF RS. 69 18 764/- WHICH WAS DULY SUPPORTED BY PROPER WORKINGS. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER EXPLAINED WITH THE SUMMARY OF SALES OF EACH QUARTER AS PER VAT RETURN WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS AND SUMMARY OF PUR CHASES OF EACH QUARTER AS PER VAT RETURN WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS AS WELL AS THE RECONCILIATION FOR DISCREPANCY. THE OTHER REASONS FOR DISCREPANCY I.E. WARRANTY PAR TS SCRAP ITEMS REPLACEMENTS OF GOODS GOODS RETURNED ETC. WHICH WERE CLAIMED TO TH E TUNE OF RS. 8 64 904/- WERE REJECTED BY THE LD. AO WITHOUT ANY COGENT REASONS. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE DIFFERENCE REPRESENTING THE EXCESS STOCK IN THE SUM OF RS. 61 48 455/- ARRIVED BY THE SURVEY TEAM WAS BASED ON THE VALUE OF CLOSING STOCK OF RS. 28 4 6 549/- WHICH WAS ARRIVED AS PER INCOMPLETE UNAUDITED PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT ON THE DATE OF SURVEY. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAINTAINS CASH BOOK BANK BOOK S ALES REGISTER PURCHASE REGISTER GENERAL LEDGER SUNDRY DEBTORS LEDGER SUNDRY CREDI TORS LEDGERS JOURNAL BOOK VAT REGISTER ETC. BUT IT DOES NOT MAINTAIN ANY STOCK RE GISTER. IT WAS ALSO EXPLAINED THAT IT IS NOT FEASIBLE TO MAINTAIN ANY STOCK REGISTER BECAUSE OF INNUMERABLE ITEMS OF MOTOR PARTS DEALT WITH BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE ACCORDING LY VALUED ITS CLOSING STOCK BASED ON PHYSICAL VERIFICATION CARRIED OUT YEAR ON YEAR. THE GROSS PROFIT DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE AT RS. 55 00 024/- ON THE TOTAL RECEIPT OF RS. 3 37 51 950/- WORKED OUT TO 16.295% WHICH WAS IN LINE WITH SIMILAR NATURE OF BUSINESS AS WELL AS EARLIER GROSS PROFIT RATES WHICH WERE ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. IT WAS SUBMITTED T HAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RETRACTED FROM THE SURRENDER MADE AT THE TIME OF SURVEY WHILE FILI NG THE RETURN OF INCOME BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE DECISION OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CA SE OF ACIT VS. AJOY BOKLI IN I.T.A NO. 312/KOL/2013 DATED 06.05.2013 WHEREIN IT WAS HELD T HAT THE STATEMENT RECORDED ON SURVEY HAS NO EVIDENTIARY VALUE FOR MAKING ADDITION IF THERE IS NO CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE. IT WAS PLEADED THAT THE LD. AO BASED ON IRRELEVANT AND EXTRANEOUS CIRCUMSTANCES OBTAINED A LETTER DATED 06.03.2014 FR OM LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE ADMITTING TO THE VALUE OF STOCK AT THE TIME OF SURVEY. IT WAS PLEADED THAT SUCH COMMITMENT CANNOT 4 ITA NO.1294/KOL/2015 M/S SUPER DIESEL A.YR.2011-12 4 OVERRIDE THE FACTS AND FIGURES ALREADY PLACED ON RE CORD WHICH IS SUPPORTED BY AUDITED BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENT W ITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS. IT WAS FURTHER PLEADED THAT THE LD. AO WHILE FRAMING THE A SSESSMENT WAS SATISFIED WITH THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE AND NO ADVERSE RE MARK SO FAR AS MAINTENANCE OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WAS MADE BY HIM IN HIS ASSESSMENT ORDER . NO FAULT IN PURCHASES SALES RATE OF GROSS PROFITS ETC. WERE FOUND BY THE LD. AO IN H IS ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED DETAILED WORKINGS OF CLOSING STOCK AS ON 31. 03.2011 BEFORE THE LD. AO AND THE LD. AO HAD NOT POINTED OUT ANY MISTAKE OR ANY ADVERSE R EMARK ON THE VALUE OF SUCH CLOSING STOCK BY STATING THAT IT IS INCORRECT. 5. THE LD. CIT(A) GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE FACTUAL BACKGROUND UNDER W HICH ADDITION WAS MADE TOWARDS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN STOCK. I HAVE ALSO EXAMIN ED THE CONTENTIONS OF AR AS WELL AS VARIOUS PAPERS & DOCUMENTS RELIED UPON AS CONTAINED AT PAPER BOOK PAGE 1 TO 109. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE CONTENTIONS OF AR AND ASSES SMENT ORDER THE DISPUTED ISSUE IS ADJUDICATED AS UNDER: THE FACTS LEADING TO ADDITION U/S 69B OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961 SHOW THAT DURING SURVEY CONDUCTED AT THE APPELLANTS BUSINESS PREMISES O N 11.02.2011 AND INVENTORY OF STOCK WAS PREPARED COVERING FORTY FOUR PAGES AND VALUED A T RS. 89 95 004/-. THE APPELLANT DID NOT MAINTAIN STOCK BOOK BECAUSE OF INNUMERABLE ITEMS OF MOTOR PARTS DEALT WITH. AS SUCH THE SURVEY PARTY OBTAINED A TRADING ACCOUNT F ROM COMPUTER AS ON 02.11.2011 WHEREIN CLOSING STOCK AS PER BOOK WAS SHOWN AT RS. 28 46 549/-. IT WAS ACCORDINGLY CONCLUDED THAT THERE WAS EXCESS STOCK OF RS. 61 48 455/-. THE STATEMENT OBTAINED FROM ONE OF THE PARTNERS IN COURSE OF SURVEY REVEAL THAT THE APPELLANT ADMITTED EXCESS STOCK. THE APPELLANT WHO PAID ADVANCE TAX ON SUCH EXCESS V ALUE OF STOCK LATER ON RETRACTED FROM SUCH ADMISSION AND FILED RETURN OF INCOME WITH OUT OFFERING ANY ADDITIONAL INCOME. THE CONTENTIONS OF AR ARE PERUSED AND FOLLOWING DOC UMENTS RELIED UPON AND FORMING PART OF PAPER BOOK ARE EXAMINED- (A) VALUATION OF STOCK BY SURVEY TEAM ON 11.02.2011 (B) UNAUDITED TRADING & PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT ON 11.0 2.2011 (C) DETAILED STATEMENT OF STOCK ON 31.03.2011 AS PER AU DITED ACCOUNTS. (D) QUARTERLY SALES & PURCHASES AS PER VAT RETURN (E) AUDITED ACCOUNTS WITH TAX AUDIT REPORT FOR 31.03.20 11 I AGREE WITH VIEWS EXPRESSED AR THAT STATEMENT U/S 131 OBTAINED FROM ONE OF THE PARTNER IN COURSE OF SURVEY ADMITTING EXCESS STOCK CANNOT H AVE ANY EVIDENTIARY VALUE FOR 5 ITA NO.1294/KOL/2015 M/S SUPER DIESEL A.YR.2011-12 5 MAKING ADDITION. IN THIS CONTEXT RELIANCE IS PLACE D TO THE DECISION OF ITAT KOLKATA BENCH IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS. AJOY BOKLI (I.T.A. N O. 312/KOL/2013) DATED 06.05.2013. HENCE ADDITION MADE BY AO MERELY BY REFERRING THE ASSESSEES ADMISSION DURING THE SURVEY CANNOT HAVE ANY LEGAL FORCE. THE AR VEHEMENTLY PROTESTED AGAINST DETERMINATION O F BOOK VALUE OF STOCK ON 11.02.2011 AT RS. 28 46 546/- BY REFERRING TO UNAUD ITED TRADING & PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT DRAWN ON THAT DATE WITHOUT ANY SUPPORT OF B ALANCE SHEET. AR HAS ALSO POINTED OUT INCONSISTENCIES SO FAR AS THEY RELATED TO RATE OF GROSS PROFIT AND STOCK/TURNOVER RATIO. THIS CONTENTION IS SCRUTINIZED AND EXAMINED FROM UN AUDITED TRADING AND PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AS ON 11.02.2011 AVAILABLE AT PAGE 52 & 53 OF PAPER BOOK. THE GROSS PROFIT OF RS. 11 50 982/- ON TOTAL TURNOVER OF RS. 2 58 53 20 4/- WORKS TO 4.45% AS AGAINST DECLARED GROSS PROFIT AS PER TAX AUDIT REPORT OF 16 .30%. SIMILARLY THE CLOSING STOCK DETERMINED AT RS. 28 46 549/- AGAINST TOTAL TURNOVE R/SALE OF RS. 2 58 53 204/- WORKS TO 11% APPROX. THIS RATIO IS OPPOSED TO TAX AUDIT REPO RT WHEREIN RATIO IS DERIVED AT 20.5%. THEREFORE I AGREE THAT DETERMINATION OF VAL UE OF STOCK ON THE DATE OF SURVEY AT RS. 28 46 549/- IS WITHOUT ANY BASIS WHATSOEVER. AC CORDINGLY THE DETERMINATION OF EXCESS STOCK OF RS. 61 48 455/- IS NOT AS PER LAW. THE AR HAS ALSO DRAWN MY ATTENTION TO THE FACT THA T QUARTERLY STATEMENT OF BOTH PURCHASES AS WELL AS SALES DISCLOSED IN THE AUDITED ACCOUNTS ARE BASED ON VAT RETURN SUBMITTED BEFORE SALES TAX AUTHORITIES. THE SALES PURCHASES AND OPENING STOCK AS RECORDED IN THE AUDITED BOOKS HAVE NEITHER BEEN DIS TURBED NOR THERE IS ANY ADVERSE COMMENTS OF THE AO. THIS CONTENTION OF THE APPELLAN T IS EXAMINED. I AGREE THAT THERE REMAINS HARDLY A SCOPE TO HOLD THAT CLOSING STOCK W AS UNDERVALUED WHERE OPENING STOCK PURCHASES AND SALES ARE ACCEPTED AS CORRECT AS WELL AS THERE IS NO VARIATION OF GROSS PROFIT RATE OF STOCK/TURNOVER RATIO. A READING OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) REVEALS THAT ONE OF THE MAIN REASON FOR ADDITION TOWARDS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN STOC K IS THE LETTER DATED 06.03.2014 WHEREIN THE REPRESENTATIVE APPEARING ON BEHALF OF T HE APPELLANT FIRM ADMITTED THE CORRECTNESS OF THE VALUE OF STOCK DURING SURVEY. I AM NOT INCLINED TO GIVE COGNIZANCE ON SO-CALLED LETTER DATED 06.02.2014 IN VIEW OF MY CAT EGORICAL FINDINGS AGAINST INCONSISTENCIES IN THE TRADING A/C ETC. PREPARED BY SURVEY TEAM. THIS IS AS PER DECISION OF DIFFERENT HIGH COURTS AS RELIED BY THE APPELLANT WHEREIN ADDITION MADE MERELY ON THE BASIS OF CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT WAS CONSIDERED BAD IN LAW. IN VIEW OF THE TOTALITY OF FACTS AND LEGAL POSITION I AM OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ADDITION OF RS. 60 48 435/- ON ACCOUNT OF EXCESS ST OCK IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW. ACCORDINGLY THE ADDITION IS DELETED. THE APPELLANT GETS RELIEF OF RS. 60 48 435/-. THIS GROUND IS ALLOWED. 6. AGGRIEVED THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 6 ITA NO.1294/KOL/2015 M/S SUPER DIESEL A.YR.2011-12 6 1. WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A)-13 KOL WAS JUSTIFIED ON FAC TS AND IN LAW IN DELETING THE ENTIRE ADDITION OF RS. 60 48 455/- MADE U/S 69B WITHOUT CALLING FOR THE REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO APPARENTLY CONTRAVENING THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 46A OF I.T. RULES WHILE THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED VARIOUS DETAIL & DOCUMENTS ADDITIONALLY IN THE FORM OF PAPER BOOK DU RING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. 2. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD NEW GROUNDS AND/O R ALTER OR MODIFY ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 7. THE LD. DR PLEADED BEFORE US THAT PAGES 1 TO 109 OF THE PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE FIRST TIME BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) A ND THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE TAKEN REMAND REPORT FROM THE LD. AO AND HENCE THE ORDE R PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) WITHOUT OBTAINING REMAND REPORT IS IN VIOLATION OF RULE 46 A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES. ACCORDINGLY HE PRAYED FOR SETTING ASIDE THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE LD. AO. IN RESPONSE TO THIS THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT PAGES 1 TO 109 O F THE PAPER BOOK WHICH WAS FILED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES IS ALSO PLACED ON RECO RD BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. NO FRESH EVIDENCES/DOCUMENTS WERE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE WARRANTING ANY REMAND REPORT TO BE OBTAINED FROM THE LD. AO. HE FURTHER ARGUED THAT IN VIEW OF INNUMERABLE MOTOR PARTS AND ACCESSORIES STOCK REGISTERS WERE NOT MAINTAIN ED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THIS FACT IS NOT IN DISPUTE. HENCE THE STOCK PRINT OUT TAKEN FROM T HE COMPUTER BY THE SURVEY TEAM IS BOUND TO HAVE SOME MISTAKES WHICH CANNOT BE RELIED UPON BY THE LD. AO WHILE FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. HE ARGUED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAD APPRECIATED THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD VALUED ITS CLOSING STOCK AS ON 31.03.2 011 BASED ON PHYSICAL VERIFICATION FOR STOCKS CARRIED OUT AT THE END OF THE YEAR. NO DISCR EPANCY WHATSOEVER HAS BEEN FOUND BY THE REVENUE IN RESPECT OF OPENING BALANCE PURCHASE AND SALES REPORTED BY THE ASSESSEE. HENCE HE ARGUED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) I S EXHAUSTIVE AND NO INTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR. 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AT THE OUTSET THE ONLY GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS WITH REGARD TO VIOLATION OF RULE 46A OF I.T. RULES COMMITTED BY THE LD. CIT(A) WHILE DISPOSING OFF THE APPEAL IN FAVOUR 7 ITA NO.1294/KOL/2015 M/S SUPER DIESEL A.YR.2011-12 7 OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THIS REGARD WE FIND THAT THE A SSESSEE HAS FURNISHED THE PAGES 1 TO 109 OF THE PAPER BOOK BEFORE US WHICH IS THE SAME AS W AS PLACED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AS PER THE CERTIFICATE GIVEN BY THE AS SESSEE IN HIS PAPER BOOK. THE LD. DR BEFORE US COULD NOT PINPOINT WHICH PART OF THIS PAP ER BOOK COMPRISING OF PAGES 1 TO 109 WERE FILED FOR THE FIRST TIME BEFORE THE LD CITA AN D HENCE ON THIS ACCOUNT ITSELF THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE DESERVES TO BE DISMISS ED. WE FIND THAT THE REVENUE HAD NOT CHALLENGED THE VALIDITY OF DELETION OF THIS ADD ITION BEFORE US. IN ANY CASE WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) HAD APPROACHED THE ENTIRE ISSUE BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE AUDITED STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT AND METHOD ADOPTED BY THE ASS ESSEE FOR VALUING ITS CLOSING STOCK I.E. CLOSING STOCK I.E. PHYSICAL VERIFICATION OF TH E INVENTORY AT THE END OF THE YEAR. IT CANNOT BE BRUSHED ASIDE THAT THE OPENING BALANCE PURCHASES AND SALES BY THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT DISPUTED BY THE REVENUE. IN ANY EVENT WE F IND THAT THE SOLE BASIS FOR FRAMING THIS ADDITION BY THE LD. AO IS PASSED ON THE STATEMENT R ECORDED AT THE TIME OF SURVEY WHICH IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION HAS GOT NO EVIDENTIARY VALUE AS THE SAME IS NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE. RELIANCE IN THIS REGARD IS PLACED ON THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. S. KHA DER KHAN SON REPORTED IN 210 TAXMAN 248 (SC). HENCE THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE R EVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 9. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 29.11.2017 SD/- SD/- [S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI] [ M.BALAGA NESH ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEM BER DATED : 29.11.2017 SB SR. PS 8 ITA NO.1294/KOL/2015 M/S SUPER DIESEL A.YR.2011-12 8 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. ITO WD.-43(4) KOLKATA 3 GOVT. PLACE(W) KOLK ATA-700001 2. M/S SUPER DIESEL 108/110 B.T. ROAD BON-HOOGHL Y KOLKATA-700108. 3.C.I.T.- 4. C.I.T.- K OLKATA. 5. CIT(DR) KOLKATA BENCHES KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVAT E SECRETARY HEAD OF OFFICE/D.D.O. ITAT KOLKATA BENCHE S