Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (2) TMI 1160 - ITAT JAIPURBogus purchases - trading addition - Held that:- We found force in the arguments of the Ld AR that when the department has accepted the sales made by M/s Clarity Gold Pvt. Ltd which is assessed to tax, how the purchases made by the assessee from the same party can be held to be unverifiable/non-genuine more particularly when the party has given the confirmation for the transaction. We accordingly agree with the contention of the assessee and the AO is directed to allow the said claim after verifying the assessment records of M/s Clarity Gold Pvt Ltd. Further, the matter in respect of unverifiable purchases in case of Anuj Kumar Varshney vs. ITO (2015 (4) TMI 533 - ITAT JAIPUR) as referred by the ld AR has since been referred and pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court. Given the consistent stand taken by this Bench, we are inclined to set aside the issues raised in this appeal in respect of unverifiable purchases from the remaining three parties (other than M/s Clarity Gold) and restore the matter to the file of AO to decide the same afresh after the judgement of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Anuj Kumar Varshney and other vs. ITO(supra) is delivered, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Addition of commission payment - Held that:- In respect of 17 parties who have complied with the summons, tax has been deducted at source and they have also reported the commission receipts in their return of income, we donot see a rationale basis which prompted the AO to disallow the commission payment. More so, where the matter is covered in favour of the assessee by earlier orders of the Coordinate Bench which has been referred to by the ld CIT(A). We accordingly upheld the deletion of additions of commission payments to these 17 parties. In respect of other 4 parties, it is noted that Shri Sudhir Jain has already complied with the summons and further assessee has filed additional evidence before the Bench. The additional evidence is accepted and the matter is set-aside to the file of the AO in respect of these 4 parties to examine the same afresh considering the additional evidence after giving proper opportunity to the assessee. Addition of travelling expenses including foreign travelling - expenditure for busniss purpose - Held that:- The assessee has provided the necessary explanation in respect of travel of tourist guide Vikas Kaul and Neeta Dadda who is a partner in the firm. Further, it is noted that on similar facts, the disallowance was deleted by ld CIT(A) for AY 2008- 09 against which the department has not filed any appeal. Keeping in mind the nature of the business of the assessee and the explanation provided by the assessee, we see not reason to interfere with the order of ld CIT(A) who has deleted the disallowance of ₹ 1 lacs towards foreign travel expenses. TDS u/s 194H - disallowance on payment to BOB and ICICI - non deduction of tds - Held that:- As in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2008-09 [2012 (2) TMI 521 - ITAT JAIPUR], we hereby delete the disallowance of ₹ 726312 under section 40a(ia) in the hands of the assessee.
|