TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 313X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e seem to be genuine. Further, mere wrong recording of names of the persons/firms who issued cheques does not ipso facto warrant addition thereof when the AO has enquired with M/s. Vamshi Parboiled Rice Mill and M/s. Manikanta Concerns. Since the errors committed by the accountants are clerical and inadvertent in nature, we delete the addition of ₹ 3,84,734 and ₹ 3,98,750. CIT(A) has observed that the sales and purchases effected by the assessee on which commission was earned was quantified at ₹ 8,53,68,651. However, the CIT(A) held that the amount which was taken as wrong credits in the books to the extent of ₹ 30,26,904 is to be increased and the turnover would be ₹ 8,83,95,556 and the gross turnover would ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3.2010 admitting the income of ₹ 1,88,300. The case was converted into scrutiny and assessment was completed on 30.12.2011 on a total income of ₹ 30,26,904 by making the following additions/disallowances: a) Addition of ₹ 22,43,420 b) Addition of ₹ 384,734 towards unaccounted cheque deposit in the bank. c) Addition of ₹ 3,98,750 towards unaccounted deposit in bank showing as a receipt from M/s. Vamshi Parboiled Rice Mill. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). 3. It was submitted that, on enquiry by the AO, the assessee had explained that the transaction had taken place but certain mistakes were committed by the accountants of the assessee who were unaware of the consequen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IT(A) further observed that the Assessing Officer was shown to have verified the books of account during the assessment proceedings, on the basis of which all the anomalies as regard to the accounting of cheques in wrong names etc., were pointed out. However, the CIT(A) further observed that during the course of the appellate proceedings, the assessee failed to furnish the books of account to ascertain the correct turnover achieved by the assessee in order to ascertain the correct profit earned by the assessee. The CIT(A) held that in the light of submissions of the assessee that profit may be calculated by estimating the commission on the total turnover, at the rate of 3%. The CIT(A) further held that from the information furnished by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oth the parties. 8. The learned counsel for the assessee before us on the issue of percentage of commission received, submitted that in his written submissions before the CIT(A), he had wrongly stated that the assessee received commission of 2% on the transactions made by him whereas actually the assessee received only 0.2%. The learned counsel for the assessee also submitted the copies of statement showing the details with regard to business transactions and commission earned for the A.Y. 2009-10 at pages 31 to 62 of the Paper Book. It was further submitted that the CIT(A) while relying on the statement submitted, failed to take the commission received as noted in the statement amounting to ₹ 2,04,647. Further, it was contended th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5,556 on which the commission is to be calculated by at 3%. Taking note of the submissions of the learned counsel for the assessee that he had wrongly stated in the written submission that the rate of commission is at 2% of the turnover whereas actually it should be 0.2%, we are of the opinion that the order of the CIT(A) estimating the commission at 3% on the gross turnover cannot be accepted. We find the actual extract for the commission received in the present assessment year has been produced by the assessee at pages 31 to 62 of the Paper Book. We also find that the commission received is recorded in the statement is about 0.5%. Hence in these circumstances, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the AO to factually verify t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
