Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (11) TMI 546 - AT - Income TaxAddition u/s. 68 or 69C - amount representing purchases made on credit - HELD THAT:- After receiving the payment of building sold, the payment was made and it was noted that the documentary proof is the books of the assessee which are audited and it shows that all these payments were made and the assessee also filed necessary evidence before the authorities below which was also accepted by the department in the next years for substantiating the claim of the assessee. We further note that the assessee has also filed the affidavit of Sh. Naresh Jain, Director of the assessee company. All these submissions of the assessee were forwarded to the AO for his comment. However, the AO adopted his earlier stand. Hence, the addition in dispute is not permissible u/s. 68 which should have been invoked u/s. 69C. We further note that the applicability of section 69C in place of section 68 of the Act applied by the AO, enabling the provision of section 292B permits the authority to do so in view of the decision in the case of Yadu Hari Dalmia vs. CIT [1980 (5) TMI 22 - DELHI HIGH COURT] . The unpaid purchase price could not be added to the income of the assessee as per the decision case of CIT vs. Ritu Anurag Aggarwal [2009 (7) TMI 1247 - DELHI HIGH COURT]. We are of the view that when purchases were not doubted by the AO, the addition in dispute u/s. 68 is not tenable. As per the aforesaid decision, in the present case AO had not disallowed the purchases from those creditors and trading result were also not disturbed. To support our aforesaid view, we draw support from the decision in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Kulwinder Singh [2017 (7) TMI 957 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] wherein it has been held that section 68 could not be invoked for the amount representing purchases made on credit. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|