Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (6) TMI 215 - AT - Income TaxBogus purchases - reason for treating the purchases as non-genuine is the assessee has not produced PAN number, no address proof, no counter-signed ledger account - HELD THAT:- The assessee in fact filed copy of TIN of the supplier to prove the identity and existence of business concern. Therefore, in our view simply because the assessee has not filed PAN, copy of ITR, these purchases cannot be treated as non-genuine. In the case of Shri Kalyan Singh the only ground on which the addition was sustained by the ld. CIT (Appeals) was that the assessee has not deducted the TDS, even though the assessee has furnished copy of ledger account in the books of the assessee company, copy of vouchers and bank statements, copy of ledger for the financial year 2010-11, copy of vouchers and ledger details in respect of the work done by the vendors. Non-deduction of TDS cannot be a ground for treating the purchases as non-genuine. Similarly in the case of Sirazuddin Gitti Supplier the addition was sustained by the ld. CIT (Appeals) for the reason that the assessee has not mentioned any TIN, did not file copy of ITR, PAN, confirmation ignoring the copy of bank statement, copy of ledger account in the books of assessee company, copy of invoices, purchase orders. The vendor here had supplied stone dust, a construction material with weigh bridge challans and invoices. Thus there is no justification in sustaining the additions by the ld. CIT (Appeals) in respect of purchases/expenses from the above parties. Thus, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition/disallowance - Decided in favour of assessee. Addition made on the alleged entries in the seized material - assessee has not explained the entries with regular books of accounts and also could not provide the identity of the parties - HELD THAT:- To find out whether the entries appearing in the diary reflects either the assessee has received the payments or made the payments. AO did not bring any material or evidence to corroborate that these expenses were incurred by the assessee. AO has not made any effort whatsoever to make any investigation even though names of persons clearly mentioned in the entries made in the loose sheets. There was no statement recorded from the assessee during the course of search vis-à-vis the impugned seized material. AO simply added the amounts appearing in the diary as unexplained income of the assessee.AO also did not verify the contention of the assessee that these loose sheets did not pertain to the assessee or it is rough work for the site purposes. Therefore, since the AO has not made any efforts to make any sort of enquiries or investigation on the entries made, we are of the view that this issue has to go back to the AO for further examination and investigation.
|