Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (3) TMI 745 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAMAdditions towards trade creditors u/s 68 - assessee has not proved the genuineness of the transactions - Held that:- On perusal of the records, we find that when ITI caused enquiries, the creditors have denied any business transaction with the assessee. Therefore, the basic requirement of genuineness of the transaction is absent. Though, the assessee claims that he has furnished confirmation letters before the A.O. as well as CIT(A), no such findings were recorded in the orders of the lower authorities. Even before us, the assessee failed to furnish evidences in the form of confirmation letters for having confirmed the creditors. Merely stating that he has filed confirmation letters would not sufficient compliance of the provisions of section 68 of the Act. The A.O. categorically stated that the creditors have denied the transaction with the assessee. Therefore, it is abundantly clear that the assessee has not proved the genuineness of the transactions. Once, the assessee failed to prove the initial burden casts upon him, by furnishing identity, genuineness of the transaction and credit worthiness of the creditors, the addition made by the A.O. u/s 68 of the Act should sustain. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the A.O. has rightly made the additions. The CIT(A), after considering the explanation of the assessee, upheld the A.O. order. We do not find any error or infirmity in the order of the CIT(A). - Decided against assessee Additions towards adhoc disallowance of expenditure - Held that:- The A.O. made 15% disallowance of expenditure under the head freight charges, loading charges and coolie charges. The A.O. was of the opinion that the assessee could not furnished bills & vouchers in support of the expenditure claimed under these heads. The CIT(A) after considering the explanations furnished by the assessee restricted the additions to ₹ 30,000/-. The fact remains same even before us. The assessee has not filed any evidence to counter the findings of the facts recorded by the CIT(A). Therefore, we are of the opinion that the CIT(A) has rightly restricted the additions to ₹ 30,000/- and we do not see any reason to interfere in the order of CIT(A). - Decided against assessee
|