Held that method of valuation adopted by the assessee has been accepted regularly accepted by the Revenue. Accordingly applying the average gross profit rate of 11.34 per cent is rejected. Tribunal also held that the assessee cannot be to forced to pay tax on undisclosed income which has been computed incorrectly although the assessee might have made a surrender at the time of search. Therefore, addition on account of difference in the valuation of stock is sustainable only to the extent admitted by the assessee. The Tribunal also held that additional income disclosed cannot be assessed assessed at 60% as per provision of S. 115BBE of the Act. (AY.2017-18)
Sham Fashion Mall v. DCIT (2022) 36 NYPTTJ 1068 / (2024) 228 TTJ 576 (Chd) (Trib) Sham Jewellers v. DCIT (2022) 36 NYPTTJ 1068 / (2024) 228 TTJ 576 (Chd) (Trib)
S. 153A: Assessment-Search-Undisclosed income-Excess stock of jewellery found during search-Average cost price for valuation of stock-Difference in valuation of stock is deleted-Additional income disclosed cannot be assessed assessed at 60% as per provision of S. 115BBE of the Act. [S. 115BBE, 132,]
Leave a Reply