Taxc/34/2009 Of Commissioner Of Incometax v. M/S Anoo Silver Palace

IN THE[HON’BLE][ HIGH][ COURT][ OF][ JUDICATURE][ FOR]CHHATTISGARH [ BILSPUR]Tax Case[N0.][ g]-0f 2009givwim"? Baggh:COMMISSIONER APPELLANT)//’INC0METAX(/(Reven[ue]RAIPURM/S ANOOP /PALACE, Anoop Plaza,§j§Asessee)Sadar[Bazar,]Raipur(C.G).:1999-2000ASSESSMENT APPEAL [ SECTION][ 260-A][ OF][ THE]INCOME [ ACT,][ 1961]¢E/7 ~ %%Wbg€ WW200 mm (Wu) 31mm (Wu)WWW‘WWW wWWWW?!4y‘ammm$WmmadebytheAsses§singOfficeronaccountofadditional profit?"“Whether2. onthe facts andinthe circumstancesofthecase,theHon’ble ITAT were justifiedinlawinholdingthesilverariestcsoldbytheassesseeduring the previous yer as pure, when no stock wasavailableforpurity[tes]on the dateof search,butpuritytest hadbeen.onductedinthecaseofitssister concern and sulier and purity was found tobe 70%whilerateserechargedfor100%puresilver.Brieflystated,thefactsofecasearethattherespondent/assessee is a partnership firm engaedin the business of silver articles.The business was closed on 31.3.204 and on that day, there was nostockof silverarticles with theresondent.lnresponseto thenoticeunder Section 153A, the-respondenfiledhis return of income declaring.totalincomeofRs.4,91,020/—.1Theassessment wascompletedunderSection 153A of the Act computing t e total income of Rs.17,52,750l- asagainstRs.4,91,020/—disclosedbytheappellant.Onappealbytherespondent/assessee, the Commissiner of Income Tax (Appeals) hadallowed the appeal andheld that frperusal[of][ the][ assessment][ order]andtheassessmentreportsubmitdbytheAssessingOfficer,itisevident that there was no materialorecord to show that any separatepurity[test][ was][ carried][ out][ at][ the][ tim]of search.The conclusion drawn a...“ g§ / MwQCWWW @ @ mW.z. wgUK)[vow/a9]mmwsiaaw WWWmaréwm mm§Wm%aiman%m ‘ Wwm by the Assessing Offiéer that the apellant earned 30% more profit overandabovetheamountdiscloseinhisreturnisbaselessandunsustainable.Thereis[no][ such]aterial/evidencein support of suchaddition.TheorderoftheCIT,Appeals)hasbeensubsequentlyconfirmed by the Income Tax Appellte[Tribunal][ by][ the][ impugned][ order.] x V After carefully examining the order of the CIT (Appeals) as alsothe order of income Tax Appellate T ibunal, we find that both the Forums.below have recorded a concurrent fiding of fact that there was no suchmaterial/evidence for the Assessing Officer for making the addition.No’oflawsubstantial questionarisesfr adjudicationof thisappeal.The'appealbeingwithoutsubstanceeservestobeandisaccordinglydismissed. \i ‘\v Sd/—i[DmENDRA]MISI-mA h v»Sdl- l ' R.N Chandrakar'g.Judgev. Judge i