9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 994X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was filed by Learned A.R. of the assessee which is dated 09/06/2015 and it is stated by him in this application that he has been authorized to represent this case very recently but since this is an old appeal and several opportunities were provided to the assessee with the remark "last opportunity", the adjournment application was rejected and the appeal of the Revenue was heard ex-parte qua the assessee. 3. Learned D.R. of the Revenue supported the assessment order. 4. In this appeal the Revenue has raised the following grounds: "1. That Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 43,000/-made under section 41(1) on account of cessation of liability without going through the facts and material brought on rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... conveyance expenses without appreciating the facts that no log book was maintained by the assessee firm and ledger account of conveyance revealed that entire payment was made in cash. 6. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 50,000/- out of Rs. 3,30,298/- made on account of oil and fuel used for generators without appreciating the fact that most of these expenses were incurred in cash and they were not open to full verification. 7. That the Ld. CIT(A) has ignored the facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 36,000/- out of depreciation that the partners are not in the ownership of any other car apart from these two cars and some alignment of personal use is involved in the usage of these vehicles ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at these are trade/business credits appearing in the books of the appellant. The total of such credits during the year is Rs. 8,13,238/-. The AO has added the amounts for want of verification/confirmation but the same is not supported by any material adverse to the appellant. While considering this issue, my attention is drawn to the decision in the following cases ;- a. Delhi ITAT 5 Member Special Bench in Manoj Agarwal; b. Allahabad High Court in 205 CTR 444 Panchamdas; & c. Gujrat High Court in 163 ITR 249 where it was held that - "Whether section 68 is applicable to creditor arising out of purchases made in normal course of business, which have not been doubted u/s 37 of the I.T. Act". Held- No 9. These being trade credits, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... delete the additions of Rs. 43,000/-, Rs. 3,42,121/- and Rs. 8,13,238/-, as per grounds no.2, 2(i) to 2(iii), 3(i) & 3(ii) and 4(i) & 4(ii) of appeal are allowed." 7. We also find that it is noted by Assessing Officer on page 3 of the assessment order that the outstanding liability of Rs. 43,000/- is said to be on account of transportation charges but the assessee is not in the knowledge of physical persons to whom this sum was paid. Similarly, regarding the second outstanding liability of Rs. 3,42,121/- being sundry creditors under the head 'rebate and commission payable', it is noted by Assessing Officer on page No. 3 of the assessment order that no confirmation or details of the parties to whom the sum was payable was furnished before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. 8. In respect of ground No. 4 to 7, as per which the Revenue is disputing the deletion of addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs. 1,00,000/-, Rs,50,000/-, Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 36,000/-, the issue was decided by CIT(A) as per Para 21 to 23 of his order, which are reproduced below for the sake of ready reference:- "21. It is also seen that the additions of Rs. 100,000/-, Rs. 50,000/-, Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 36,300/- are also added by the AO in the similar manner without assigning any reason. It is noted that 'possibility of making personal/non business purposes', 'possibility leakages/ inflation', 'absence of supporting evidence', 'not properly vouched' are the reasons for these disallowances. Obviousl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t such finding of personal use of car. Accordingly, AO is directed to delete the addition. For the reasons above, the additions made by AO are deleted and Grounds No. 5, 7, 8(i) and 8(ii) of appeal are allowed." 9. When we examine the assessment order, we find that it is noted by the Assessing Officer on page No. 4 that it has been implicitly agreed by the assessee that the expenses on telephone are not wholly and fully vouched and a flexible attitude is held by the assessee as for telephone calls are concerned. This is also noted that in assessment year 2001-02 also, the books of account were rejected u/s 145(3) and the CIT(A) has made addition of Rs. 50,000/- out of conveyance expenses, Rs. 1,00,000/- out of telephone, Rs. 36,000/- out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
