1. - This income-tax appeal has been filed by the appellant-assessee challenging the judgment dated 20.03.2009, of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench 'B' Jaipur, (for short, 'the ITAT') whereby the ITAT upheld the judgment dated 26.03.2007 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Alwar (for short, 'the CIT'), who in its turn, confirmed the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer.

2. Factual matrix of the case is that on 06.05.2002 a survey under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') was conducted at the business premises of the appellant-assessee in which it was found that the books of account had been written only up to 26.04.2002 and no entries were thereafter made till the date of survey. The appellant-assessee, however, on 02.12.2003 filed its return of income declaring income of Rs. 6,69,050/- along-with audited balance-sheet, profit and loss account tax audit report dated 22.11.2003. Since the survey was carried out under Section 133A of the Act, the case of the appellant-assessee was selected for compulsory scrutiny by issuing notice to it under Section 143(2) on 06.05.2004, however, the jurisdiction of the case was transferred to Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Alwar, as the income of the appellant-assessee exceeded Rs. 5,00,000/- and therefore notice under Section 143(2) and 143(1)(ii) along-with query letter was issued to the appellant on 27.10.2005 by the said authority. The assessing officer i.e. the Assistant Commissioner, Income-tax, passed an assessment order on 22.03.2006 thereby computing the income of the appellant at Rs. 7,94,420/-, on the ground that during the course of survey an unexplained cash to the tune of Rs. 2,95,000/- and unexplained stock to the tune of Rs. 2,28,086/- have been discovered and further the assessing officer disallowed the interest under Section 36(1)(iii) to the tune of Rs. 26,833/-. The appellant-assessee preferred an appeal on 28.04.2006 before the CIT (Appeals), Alwar, assailing the additions made by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Alwar. The appeal was, however, dismissed by order dated 26.03.2007. It was thereafter that the appellant-assessee preferred further/second appeal before the ITAT, Jaipur, which, by its judgment dated 20.03.2009, dismissed the same upholding the judgment of the CIT (Appeals) and the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer. Hence, this appeal under Section 260-A of the Act.

3. Shri Anant Kasliwal, learned counsel for the appellant-assessee has argued that the learned ITAT and the authorities there below failed to appreciate that the appellant-assessee had furnished copy of the cash book before the assessing authority, which also included unexplained items. The entries in the cash book were made only up-to 26.04.2002, however, for subsequent period till the survey was conducted i.e. 06.05.2002, such entries could not be made because the accountant of the appellant-assessee was on leave. Cash balance as per the cash book as on 06.05.2002 was Rs. 4,13,744/- and, out of the same, a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- was deposited in the bank account and balance cash was found during the course of survey.

4. Learned counsel argued that stock lying in the godown was duly recorded in the books of account and as such the same was not undisclosed as alleged by the assessing officer. The unaccounted retail sales, recorded in the loose papers found during the course of survey, relate to the period from 26.04.2002 to 06.05.2002 and the same was properly recorded in the books of account which have been duly verified by the assessing officer. It was contended that the onus of verifying the entries made in the cash book after date of survey was on the assessing officer, who has utterly failed to discharge the same. Despite of this contentions raised, the ITAT has failed to examine them in their true perspective and erred in law in holding that the appellant-assessee failed to submit cogent