Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 2490 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance of service charges paid for procurement of raw material - no TDS was deducted from the said amount - Held that:- In view of the certificate of the accountant under first proviso to subsection (1) of section 201 certifying furnishing of return of income and payment of tax, etc, we remand this issue to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer to examine the factual matrix and then decide in accordance with law. The assessee be given opportunity of being heard. Even otherwise, insertion of second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) with effect from 01/04/2003 is declaratory and curative in nature with retrospective effect from 01/04/2005, inserted by Finance (No.2) Act, 2004, thus, the Assessing Officer is directed to examine the claim of the assessee whether the said amount has been included as income of the payee. Suppression of sales - Addition on process loss - Held that:- The Assessing Officer noticed that Tijiya Steel debited the amount of commission on sale of 400 kgs ascorbic acid vide letter dated 15/08/2008 and 1000 kgs on 12/08/2008, whereas, in the case of standard pharmaceutical, 500 kgs in the month of August and 750 kgs in the month of September. The assessee did not show any purchases in the month of August and September of ascorbic acid. The Assessing Officer found defects in the books of accounts as there was suppression of sales in comparison to raw material purchased, therefore, the books were rejected, being, found unreliable. From the quantity details filed by the assessed, there is a clear difference/shortage of material. Even the assessee admitted before the Assessing Officer that there was shortage of the yield/end product. Therefore, we find no infirmity in the conclusion drawn by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the factual finding recorded in the assessment order. So far as, the contention of the ld. counsel for the assessee that proper opportunity was provided to the assessee, is concerned, we find no merit in the contention as sufficient opportunity was provided to the assessee during assessment proceedings as well as during first appellate stage. Even it is presumed that lesser time was provided during assessment proceedings, nothing prevented the assessee to file necessary details before the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as before this Tribunal. The assessee is merely harping that proper opportunity was not provided. The assessee has to explain as to how opportunity was not provided. The facts, clearly indicates that the assessee was unable to substantiate its claim with documentary evidence, thus, we find on infirmity in the conclusion drawn by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - Decided against assessee
|