Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (5) TMI 346 - AT - Income TaxIncome from other sources -assessee declared total export sale of ₹ 4,59,95,595/- against which certain expenses under various heads were claimed - AO considering the fact that the major expenses consisted of consumable store, dyeing and processing embroidery charges, fabrication charges, packing material and labour charges etc. and guided by the fact that in the preceding assessment year, it had been held that the major expenses were bogus wherein the export sale were also found to be not genuine - CIT(A) deleted addition - Held that:- There is no adverse finding specifically regarding the parties from whom the material was procured and also regarding the parties to whom payment for expenses were made or incurred. Once the evidences in support of the claim of purchases/expenses were produced before the AO and that after production of the same, the AO is not satisfied, he is required to give cogent reasons to reject the evidences produced. The burden of procuring the confirmations of such parties and also of producing the same for examination cannot be shifted on the assessee, as these are third parties who for various reasons may not choose to heed to the assessee's request for appearance before Income Tax authorities. In the appellant's own case wherein it was held that the adverse findings of earlier years were applicable with reference to those particular parties only and if those parties do not appear in the other years, no cognizance of the adverse findings in earlier years can be imported in the assessment of other years in absence of adverse material on record in this year. Thus AO had no material or evidence to reject the purchases and other expenses claimed in the P&L Account when such expenses were duly reflected in the audited books of accounts produced and the same being supported with the vouchers produced before the AO. Therefore, allow the above ground of appeal in favour of the appellant and accordingly, the addition of ₹ 4,59,94,594/- is directed to be deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. Introduction of further capital - CIT(A) deleted addition - Held that:- So far as sources of other credits in the bank account are concerned, the same is duly supported with the audited accounts. The AO's objection in the remand report regarding source of credits in the Bank A/c of UTI Bank from which withdrawal has been made for making investment for ₹ 12,88,000/- has been examined from the Cash Book and the Bank A/c at UTI Bank and the same was found to be explained. It is however, relevant to note that the source of credits in Bank A/c of the appellant was not the subject matter of addition in this appeal, which was related to the credits in capital account. Regarding addition of ₹ 10 lakh made by way of FDR provided by the husband of the appellant, the same issue also appears in the appeal of the husband, Shri Anil Dhingra and it is found that the husband has confirmed handing over of FDR of ₹ 10 lakh to wife and the same has been credited by her in her capital account. The explanation regarding the source of FDR for ₹ 10 lakhs has been accepted in the appeal order dated 02.05.2011 in Appeal No. 393/07-08 in case of Shri Anil Dhingra. Therefore, the question of any additional investment by way of this FDR does not arise in appellant's case. In view of above discussion, the additions of ₹ 12,88,000/- and the ₹ 10,00,000/- stand deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|