Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (9) TMI 192 - AT - Income TaxValidity of assessment - non-service of the notice u/s.143(2) - HELD THAT:- As observed from the order-sheet produced by the CIT DR that the order has been issued on 04.09.2014 for fixing the case for hearing on 13.10.2014 which has been duly dispatched to the assessee on 12.09.2014 as per the Dispatch No.6181, Office of the Additional CIT/JCIT, Range-2, Bhubaneswar and it has not been returned unserved. It is also clear from the assessment order that the assessee has appeared from time to time before the AO, which is clear from the order-sheet produced by the CIT DR and the assessee has never raised any objection regarding service of notice and jurisdiction of the AO before the AO as well as before the CIT(A). It is also clear from the record that the assessee has raised this issue first time before us, however, the documents which were produced before us, did not speak that the assessee has raised this issue before the lower authorities. CIT DR has produced sufficient evidences for substantiating the case in favour of Revenue and we are in agreement with the documents produced by the ld. CIT DR regarding legal issue raised by the assessee. We dismiss the legal grounds raised by the assessee in the form of additional ground challenging the issuance of notice u/s.143(2) of the Act by the AO as well as the ground No.1 raised by the assessee in the grounds of appeal filed in Form 36. Addition to sundry creditors - HELD THAT:- From the order of AO, we find that the AO has accepted the cost of raw material consumed, work-in-progress and finished goods as well as revenue from operations but the AO has not accepted the current liabilities appeared in the books of the assessee. Without the purchases, how the manufacturing process can be done and sales can be made. If there was not genuine or bogus creditors credited by the assessee the effect must be given on the financial statements prepared by the assessee. But the AO has one-sided taken view that the purchase is bogus. This view of the AO is not correct and our view is supported by the decision of the coordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case of Smt. Sudha Loyalka [2018 (7) TMI 1892 - ITAT DELHI] - we delete the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) on account of unexplained sundry creditors. Addition for want of non-compliance by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings - HELD THAT:- After careful consideration of the rival submissions, we noticed from the financial statements for the relevant financial year 2012-2013 after current liabilities there is appearing of advance from parties of ₹ 28,50,000/- and there is also opening balance of ₹ 25,50,000/- for the current financial year i.e. only exceeded ₹ 3 lakhs exceeded. During the course of hearing, ld. AR of the assessee submitted that no any fresh advances have been taken from the parties, therefore, as per our considered opinion, ₹ 25,50,000/- is relating to the financial year ended 31.03.2012, which cannot be added in this current assessment year under the scrutiny proceedings. Therefore, the assessee gets relief of ₹ 25,50,000/- and ₹ 3 lakhs is upheld. This ground No.3 of the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.
|