- (1.) This appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is at the instance of an Assesses and is directed against an order dated July 21, 2003 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, "D" Bench, Kolkata, in Income-tax Appeal No. 132/Calcutta/2001 relating to the Assessment Year 1997-98 thereby confirming the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals).
(2.) Being dissatisfied, the Assesses has come up with the present appeal. A Division Bench of this Court, at the time of admission of this appeal, formulated the following substantial questions of law: a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Learned Tribunal was justified in law in not obtaining the set off of intangible additions made in the past on account of suppressed sales with the excess stock detected at the time of survey. b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Learned Tribunal was justified in law in holding that there is no infirmity in the offer of the CIT(A) in confirming the discrepancy accounted for through disclosure of unaccounted stock as well as unaccounted sales on the ground that the calculation of stock as well as sales pertaining to the assessment year 1997-1998 has been worked out in details.
(3.) The facts giving rise to filing of this appeal may be summed up thus: a) A survey under Section 133A was conducted in the business premises of the Assesses on January 09, 1997 and some books of accounts and documents were impounded under Section 131(3) of the Act. The assessment for the Assessment Year 1995-96 was reopened under Section 148 of the Act and after scrutinizing the impounded books, the Assessing Officer found that there was suppression of sales to the tune of Rs. 27,36,906/-. The Assessing Officer applied the gross profit ratio of 5.25% thereon and made an intangible addition amounting to Rs. 1,43,688/-. b) Being dissatisfied with the said order of the assessment, the Assesses preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) objecting to the addition of Rs. 1,43,688/- made by the Assessing Officer as gross profit ratio. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), however, confirmed the said order of addition. c) Being dissatisfied, the Assesses preferred an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and the said Tribunal has dismissed the appeal of confirming the order of the Commissioner of Incometax (Appeals). d) Similarly, in respect of the Assessment Year 1996-97, the Assessing Officer made estimated addition on account of gross profit to the tune of Rs. 8,19,704/- and on an appeal being preferred, the appellate authority reduced the gross profit addition of Rs. 8,19,704/-made by the Assessing Officer to Rs. 2,84,699/- thereby giving relief of Rs. 5,35,005/-. e) In respect of the Assessment Year in question, i.e. the Assessment Year 1997-98, the Assessing Officer found the total suppressed sales at Rs. 1,23,98,705/- and applied the gross profit ratio of 7% thereby making an addition of Rs. 8,67,910/- as estimated gross profit on suppressed sales. f) Being dissatisfied, the Assesses preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) reduced the addition on suppressed sales from Rs. 8,67,910/- to Rs. 7,77,400/- and allowed the set-off of the same against the unexplained investment in stock. g) Being aggrieved by the said order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) for not allowing the full set-off of the G.P. additions on suppressed sales sustained in the Assessment Years 1995-96 and 1996-97 amounting to Rs. 1,43,688/- and Rs. 2,84,699/- respectively, against the unaccounted stock disclosed or found, the Assesses preferred an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and by the order impugned herein, the said Tribunal dismissed the appeal. h) Being dissatisfied, the Assesses has come up with the present appeal.;