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

  • RTI

Lokayukta Police not exempt from disclosure of information under RTI Act 2005 – SC

Lokayukta Police not an ‘intelligence and security’ organisation  and hence not exempt from disclosure of information under RTI Act 2005…

14 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Payment of imprest whether a transfer within the meaning of section 269ST

Payment of imprest whether a transfer within the meaning of section 269ST – case remanded for determination In a recent…

3 days ago
  • ICAI

CA Misconduct – Order quashed as judgment not passed by same members who heard arguments.

CA Misconduct – Appellate order quashed as final judgment was not passed by same members who heard arguments. In a…

5 days ago
  • Insurance

Deceased homemaker can not be considered as dependant for award of compensation under MV Act – SC

Deceased homemaker can not be considered as dependant for award of compensation under MV Act. Courts to award a composite…

5 days ago
  • Income Tax

CIT notice u/s 263 quashed as AO rightly took DVO value of property as actual sale price

CIT Revision notice u/s 263 quashed as the Assessing Officer rightly taken DVO value of property sold as actual sale…

7 days ago
  • GST

Extension of timeline for implementation of Ship To GSTIN & Voluntary Closure of E-Way Bill functionalities

Extension of timeline for implementation of mandatory "Ship To GSTIN" and Voluntary Closure of E-Way Bill functionalities GSTN Advisory dated…

7 days ago