TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 389X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s by CIT(A) is on right footing and does not call for any interference. The revenue has also not been able to dislodge the reasons given by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) for rejection of books of account, which has resulted in estimation of addition @ 25% of the total purchases - AO has made the addition of sundry creditors, but the sundry creditors are, in fact, the trade creditors of the assessee on account of purchases made by the assessee, which the assessee is unable to substantiate with the proof. In the circumstances, the finding of the CIT(A) is liable to be upheld - In the circumstances, both the appeals of revenue and assessee stand dismissed. - ITA No. 558/Kol/2011 & ITA No.620/Kol/2011 - - - Dated:- 5-6-2012 - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rcumstances of the case to hold (at lines 18-20 on page 6 of his order) that addition u/s.68 of the I T Act cannot be made in respect of trade creditors when provisions of section 68 apply in all cases where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee..... and when the very provisions of section 68 do not make any distinction between the credit entry in respect of monetary transactions and the trade credit entry. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) failed in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case to hold in the said lines of his order that addition u/s.68 of the I T Act cannot be made in respect of trade creditors when in the ratio of the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Dharamavat Provision Stores [ (1981) 7 Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e had failed to prove the purchases from these parties as per even the CIT(A) and the assessee had not produced the suppliers either before the AC or even before the CIT(A) himself for due verification. 7. That the appellant craves leave to add, delete, alter or modify the grounds anytime during the appellate proceedings. 5. It was submitted by the learned CIT/DR that the assessee is an exporter and reseller of jute, onion, rice and ammonium sulphate and seeds etc. It was the submission that the assessee had shown sales of Rs.4,38,48,405, purchases of Rs.4,14,76,397/- and net profit of Rs.2,22,376/- in the P L account. It was submitted that assessee has also shown sundry creditors of Rs.1,61,12,500/-. It was the submission that in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the negative. It was the submission that the so-called M/s. Radhika Exports through whom the assessee claimed to have made the payment to the sundry creditors were also not produced before the Assessing Officer for examination. It was further submitted that the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had also asked the assessee to prove the relationship between the assessee and M/s. Radhika Exports, which was also not done. It was the submission that consequently, on the ground that assessee had refused to produce her own financial statements, bank statements and purchase bill etc. or prove the relationship between M/s. Radhika Exports and assessee, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had invoked the provisions of sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... use the sundry creditors for the supply of goods did not respond to the notices from the Assessing Officer, no addition was liable to be made nor accounts of the assessee was liable to be rejected and estimated addition by disallowing of purchase was liable to be made. ITA No.620/Kol/2011 A.Y 2006-07 (by the assessee) 9. In this assessee s appeal assessee has raised following grounds of appeal :- 1. FOR THAT the impugned action of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) XII, Kolkata in invoking the provisions of s. 145 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and upholding the addition in the sum of Rs. 1,03,69,099/- made u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Ld. Income Tax Officer, Ward 42(2), Kolkata is altogether arbitrary, base ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... restored. 12. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the orders of the Assessing Officer as also the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) clearly shows that the assessee had been given substantial no. of opportunities to prove the creditors. The assessee has done nothing to prove the genuineness of the creditors. The assessee having done nothing to substantiate its claim of sundry creditors, nor having done anything to explain the relationship between assessee and M/s. Radhika Exports through whom assessee has claimed to have done the business, the assessee cannot be entitled to relief. A perusal of the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) shows that the assessee has been unable to substantiate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
