TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 757X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hase of goods – Held that:- Additions made on the plea that bill no. 4 dated 19.1.2007 of M/s Guru Nanak Traders for an amount of Rs. 3,55,000/- was found at the business premises of the assessee. The assessee tendered in his statement that the goods mentioned in the bills have not been delivered till date and were transported through Sanjay Transport Company of Jabalpur on 20.1.2007 only. Identically bill bearing no. 76 dated 20.1.2007 of M/s Jeetu Steels for Rs.1,20,365/- was found which was issued in the name of Shreenath Traders. The assessee claimed that he did not purchase the goods appearing in the bill. On perusal of the observations the explanation offered by the assessee justification in the conclusion of the CIT(A) exists - appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Steel group wherein as per the Revenue, entries regarding unrecorded transactions in the name of the assessee were found. The assessee was asked to explain the entries made in the loose papers (a) LPS 2, Rs. 65,000/- dated 16.10.2006, (b) LPS 2 Rs.1,35,000/- also dated 16.10.2006 and (c) LPS 2 Rs. 1,50,000/- of even date. In response to the query, the assessee requested for copy of the documents seized which was provided. The assessee vide reply dated 19.12.2008 explained that the assessee made payment to M/s Anant Steels by way of cheque and no cash was paid by the assessee. The assessee also produced the books of the assessee evidencing that the payments were made by cheque by further claiming that during the relevant period, no purch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... identical to the ground raised. On the other hand, the ld. Counsel for the assessee defended the impugned order. 3.1 We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. Before coming to any conclusion, we are reproducing hereunder the conclusion of the CIT(A) :- 4.2 Next ground of appeal is directed against addition made for difference in cash balance noticed in the course of survey operation which has been added by A.O. as unexplained expenditure. The findings of the A.O. to say the least is fallations. It is difficult to understand and appreciate that if there was a shortage of cash vis-a-vis cash actually found and as per cash book, how the difference can be treated as unexplained expenditure. Onc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the learned Assessing Officer as well as of the CIT(A) and considered the arguments advanced by the learned respective counsel. Before coming to any conclusion, we are reproducing hereunder the conclusion of the CIT(A) :- 4.3.2 On consideration of entire facts on record the appellant s contentions are found to carry force and the addition for unexplained excess stock is not found to be justified and proper though A.O. has held that the appellant has kept on changing his version about the difference in stock. Thus addition of Rs. 1,04,830/- is directed to be deleted. If the totality of facts are analysed, we find that the impugned addition was made by the Assessing Officer merely on the presumption that the assessee kept changing his ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
