Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (6) TMI 1094 - AT - Income TaxConfirmation of addition made on account of bogus purchases - Held that:- The settled position of law with regard to any expenditure claimed to have been incurred by the assessee, the onus is on the assessee to prove that such expenditure was for the business purpose. In the case in hand, the assessee has claimed certain purchases, however, the assessee has not placed any corroborative details of the raw-material so purchased. Moreover, the purchases so made from the parties could not be verified by the AO. The AO has made efforts by sending letters to the given address, but the letters so sent and the information as sought by the AO was not furnished by the assessee or the parties concerned. - Decided against assessee Claim of higher remuneration payable to partners as per section 40(b)(v)(2) - Held that:- Admittedly, the assessee has not made the claim in the original return in respect of the higher remuneration payable to the partners. The assessee has not revised its return and no correction has been made in the account. We find that the ld.CIT(A) has rejected the ground on the basis that the ground has been raised as an afterthought to negate the tax made by the AO. Therefore, the assessee cannot blow hot and cold, therefore, we do not see any infirmity in the order of the ld.CIT(A), same is hereby upheld - Decided against assessee Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) - addition of account of bogus purchases - Held that:- The assessee has also placed on record the confirmations by the concerned parties. The AO made addition on the basis that the assessee failed to produce the parties. However, other details in the nature of PANs and confirmations of concerned parties were furnished. Under these facts, we are unable to accept the argument of Revenue, since the AO has not made further enquiry to verify the correctness of confirmations. It is settled law that the quantum proceedings and the penalty proceedings are two separate proceedings. Even if addition is sustained, it is not necessary that penalty would automatically be sustained. If the assessee is able to demonstrate that under the given facts, penalty should not be sustained in the light of judicial pronouncements and the statutory provisions. - Decided in favour of assessee
|