ITAT Asr: Disallowance for higher consumable stores without rejection of books or declaring expenditure bogus where stock register is not maintained is not sustainable

Shivam Metal Shaper :I.T.A No. 123/(Asr)/2017: 15-09-2017

 

Cases Followed

P&H High Court in KS Bhatia 269 ITR 577

Chhattisgarh High Court in Roop Chand Tharani 249 CTR 326

ITAT Asr Harpreet Singh Gulati ITA 317/ASR/2013

PMS Diesel ITA 317/ASR/2013

Kashmir Steel Rolling Mills ITA 509/Asr/2016 dtd 04-09-2017

 

P&H High Court in KS Bhatia 269 ITR 577

“……………..in the absence of a definite finding that the case of assessee comes within the provisions of section 145(1) that it was not possible for Assessing Officer to make additions to the gross profit. It has been further held that mere fact that profits as compared to earlier year were lower does not warrant an addition…………………….”

 

Chhattisgarh High Court in  Roop Chand Tharani 249 CTR 326

“………………without pointing out any specific mistake in the books of account, the Assessing Officer cannot reject the books of account………………..”

 

Kashmir Steel Rolling Mills ITA 509/Asr/2016 dtd 04-09-2017

“……….the assessee was not able to produce some of the expenditure vouchers…………… a disallowance @ 1/10 of these expense is being made………………….. The Assessing Officer in its assessment order dated 28.12.2006 had not rejected the books of account of the assessee and there is no finding given by the Assessing Officer in its assessment order that the books of account are not reliable or unverifiable…………………. there is no question of making any ad-hoc disallowance towards consumption of bagasse…………………….”

ITAT Asr : Abhishek Industries 286 ITR 1 is not applicable where disallowance u/s 36(1)(iii) is made inspite of availability of owned capital

M/s. N.R.C. Industries Ltd.:ITA No.139/(Asr)/2017 dtd 31/08/2017

 

Followed :

1.Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of The Dy. CIT, Central Circle-II, Jalandhar. Versus of M/s Holy Faith International Pvt. Ltd., ITA no. 87/2017 O & M, decided on 24-07-2017

2. CIT-1, Ludhiana Vs. Rakesh Gupta, ITA No.37-2014, dated 2.07.2015

3. ACIT Vs. Omax Bikes Limited’ ITA No.l085/Chd/2013 dated 06.08.2015.

How to compute period of limitation referred to in section 73(10) or section 74(10) where an issue on which the Appellate Authority or the Appellate Tribunal or the High Court has given its decision which is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue in some other proceedings and an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal or the High Court or the Supreme Court against such decision is pending

While computing the period of limitation referred to in section 73(10) or section 74(10), the period spent between the date of the decision of the Appellate Authority / Appellate Tribunal / High Court and the date of the decision of the Appellate Tribunal / the High Court / the Supreme Court as the case may be, shall be excluded.

(ICAI FAQ PUBLICATIONS 06-09-2017 General provisions relating to determination of tax : FAQ NO 27)