Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (10) TMI 438 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance of sundry creditors - bogus purchases - HELD THAT:- The evidences on record clearly show that the purchases made from Mittal Paper Mart are total bogus purchases as Mittal Paper Mart itself was a bogus firm. Even in the statement of accounts of Mittal Paper Mart, there is no receivables from the assessee. Reliance on the order of the Additional Commissioner Grade – 2 (Appeal 2) Commercial Tax Department will also do not good to the assessee as we cannot question the wisdom of the Additional Commissioner [Appeal], Commercial Taxes Department. The documentary evidences brought on record emanating from the assessment proceedings supported by the remand report establishes only one fact that the credit entries in the name of Mittal Paper Mart P/o Shri Radhey Shyam Mittal is unexplained credit which is supported by evidences on record. Merely because the transactions have been done by account payee cheques would not suffice when the forensic expert’s report clearly proves that the account was operated in the handwriting of Shri Puneet Jain, and all deposits and withdrawals were made in the handwriting of Shri Puneet Jain. Onus was upon the assessee to explain the genuineness of the credit entries and since Mittal Paper Mart was creditor of the assessee, Shri Radhey Shyam Mittal appeared before the Assessing Officer in response to the summons issued u/s 131 of the Act for and behalf of the assessee. Therefore, technically, Shri Radhey Shyam Mittal was assessee’s own witness. All that is meant by the principle ‘Audi Alteram Partem’ is that no party should be condemned unheard. Once the evidences are collected by the Assessing Officer have been placed before the assessee for his information, comment and criticism, it meets all the requirements of principles of natural justice. Natural justice certainly includes that any statement of a person before it is accepted against somebody else, that somebody else should have an opportunity of meeting it by way of interrogation or by way of comment does not matter so long as the party charged has a fair and reasonable opportunity to see, comment or criticise the evidences. The statement of Shri Radhey Shyam Mittal prompted the Assessing Officer to make further enquiry from the bank and the evidences collected from bank were referred to forensic expert for verification of handwriting and report of the forensic expert was made available to the assessee on which the assessee did not even care to make any comment. No merits in the submissions of the assessee. Addition is sustained. - Decided against assessee. Addition being unverified sundry debtors - HELD THAT:- Such debit entries cannot become income of the assessee. The assessee was showing bogus sales out of bogus purchases and we have confirmed the addition on account of bogus purchases to the extent of ₹ 17.31 crores. Any addition out of the sales made out of the aforesaid purchases would result into double addition. We, therefore, do not find any merit in this addition of debit entry and the same is directed to be deleted. - Decided against revenue
|