Income Tax

Rejected goods cannot be considered for valuation of closing stock, hence no concealment of income – ITAT

Rejected goods cannot be considered for valuation of closing stock. Therefore there was concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of such income

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2561 (2018) (10) ITAT

In the instant case, the appellant assessee had filed the appeal against the order of the CIT(A) confirming penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

The assessee was engaged in the business of manufacturing and export of leather goods.

During the year under consideration, some of the goods sold by the assessee were rejected. These rejected raw material were also available in the business premises of the assessee.

Since due to the rejected raw material / goods there was a difference in valuation of stock, the Assessing Officer took it into consideration for the purpose of making addition on the basis of the closing stock valuation.

The assessee submitted that if the rejected goods were not taken into consideration, there cannot be any addition. The consequent levy of penalty was not justified.

Moreover, it was contended that due to difference in valuation of closing stock, it could not be said that the assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of his income or concealed any part of his income.

The Tribunal opined that when the assessee rejected some goods and purchased only the balance, the rejected pieces cannot be considered for valuation of closing stock. Therefore, it cannot be said that there was concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of such income.

Accordingly, the Tribunal set aside the orders of both the authorities below and the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer as confirmed by the CIT(Appeals) was deleted.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

ITAT allows exemption of Rs. 25 lakhs u/s 10(10A) to non-government employees

ITAT allowed increased exemption of Rs. 25 lakhs u/s 10(10A) to non-government employees in view of CBDT retrospective notification. In…

21 hours ago
  • Income Tax

PCIT has revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263 over the cases passed by the NFAC or the JAO

PCIT has revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263 over the cases irrespective of the fact that the relevant assessment was completed physical…

1 day ago
  • Insurance

Appellate court interfering with MACT finding must undertake reappreciation of evidence

Appellate court interfering with Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal findings on assessment of disability and loss of earning capacity must undertake…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

When delay is not huge & involves huge monetary liability, lenient approach to be taken

When period of delay is not very huge and involve huge monetary liability on the assessee, a lenient approach should…

2 days ago
  • SEBI

EoGM of company can not ratify diversion of fund raised by preferential issue – SC

Ratification by EoGM of the company can not give legality of the diversion of the fund raised by preferential issue.…

3 days ago
  • Excise/Custom

Return of export cargo from Hormuz Strait where vessel do not lands at original port

CBIC prescribes procedures for return of export cargo from international waters due to closure of the Strait of Hormuz where…

3 days ago