Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Laxmi Narayan Jewellery Vs ITO (ITAT Cuttack)
Appeal Number : ITA No.394/CTK/2018
Date of Judgement/Order : 10/07/2020
Related Assessment Year : 2013-14
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.

Laxmi Narayan Jewellery Vs ITO (ITAT Cuttack)

From the order passed u/s.143(3) of the assessment year 2012-2013, there is no any single word found in regard to survey proceedings u/s.133A of the Act, whereas the documents were available with the same AO i.e. Ward-2(2), Balasore and the assessee accepted some discrepancy in stock and agreed to pay tax thereon. Further we observe from the order of CIT(A) that the ld. CIT(A) after taking into account of the two branches, enhanced/modified the assessment made by the AO but has given substantial relief after considering all the submissions and documents available before him. We have also gone through the statements recorded by the survey team of partners of the firm named as M/s Laxminarayan Rana in case of Motiganj premises at Balasore and statement of Shri Deepak Kumar Rana, M/s Laxminarayan Jewellery, Vivekananda Marg, Balasore. In both the statements the total discrepancy in stock declared of Rs.1,30,26,864/-, which are evident from the para No.6 of Annexure-4 filed in paper book at pages 42 & 43 and Question Nos.31 & 32 in Annexure-5 at page 50 of the paper book. The total declaration made by them is Rs.1,30,26,864/- only for the assessment year 2012-2013 in which they have undertaken payment of self-assessment tax of Rs.40 lakhs in four installments. Except the above declaration, there are nowhere in the statements recorded during the course of search, any other declaration by the partners. We noted from the order of both the authorities below that they have made additions for the financial year 2012-2013 relevant to assessment year 2013-2014. Once the statements have been accepted by the survey team the tax should be calculated by them for the relevant years accepted by the assessee. In view of the above findings noted by us, it should be taxed in the assessment year 2012-2013. Accordingly, we quash the order of both the authorities below and delete the entire addition made by the AO.


The assessee has filed this appeal against the order of CIT(A), Cuttack, dated 30.08.2018 for the A.Y.2013-2014, on the following grounds of appeal :-

1. For that, the order passed by the learned C.I.T.(A) is not just and proper under the facts and in the circumstances of the case, as such, the same is liable to be quashed in the interest of justice.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.


Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Post by Date
July 2024