TMI Blog2010 (12) TMI 1169X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making addition of ₹ 67,45,000/- u/s.68 of the Act for unexplained unsecured loans. 3. At the time of hearing before us, it is stated by the learned counsel that the Assessing Officer made addition of ₹ 67,45,000/- being the credit in the account of the following parties: i) Dilip Weaving Works ₹ 1,50,000 ii) Dilip Silk ₹ 20,40,000 iii) Rajesh Rayon ₹ 1,30,000 iv) Siddharth Silk ₹ 50,000 v) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... account. That the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court as well as Hon ble Apex Court have held that, if creditors are assessed to income-tax and the assessee has furnished their confirmation in which their permanent account numbers are mentioned, then the onus which lay upon the assessee would be discharged. He also stated that almost every creditor is assessed with the same Assessing Officer. Even if the creditor was assessed with any other Assessing Officer from their balance sheet filed with income tax return the credit balance of the assessee can be easily verified. In support of the assessee s contention, he relied upon the following decisions: i) CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Ltd., 159 ITR 78 (SC) ii) DCIT Vs. Rohini Builders, 258 ITR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ell as the assessee. Admittedly, these evidences were not produced before the Assessing Officer and the natural justice demands that the Assessing Officer should be given an opportunity to examine these evidences. We therefore set aside the order of the authorities below on this point and restore the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer. We direct him to allow adequate opportunity to the assessee to produce these bank statements before him. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer will decide the issue afresh in accordance with law. Before we part with the matter, we may mention that the assessee has also relied upon the decision of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Orissa Corporation (supra) and the decision in the case of Rohini ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... therefore submitted that due to substantial increase in the turnover, no addition to the GP rate is required and GP declared at 8.27% should be accepted as reasonable. The learned DR, relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 9. We have carefully considered the arguments of both the sides and perused the material placed before us. We find that during the year under consideration, the turnover has increased more than three times as compared to the last year. In such circumstances, the application of the same GP rate as declared in the last year cannot be said to be justified. The contention of the learned counsel that the assessee could achieve such substantial increase in the turnover only by selling the goods at lesser margin cann ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
