Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Paras Organics Pvt Ltd Versus Addl. CIT-10 (2) , Mumbai

2015 (10) TMI 2490 - ITAT MUMBAI

Disallowance of service charges paid for procurement of raw material - no TDS was deducted from the said amount - Held that:- In view of the certificate of the accountant under first proviso to subsection (1) of section 201 certifying furnishing of return of income and payment of tax, etc, we remand this issue to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer to examine the factual matrix and then decide in accordance with law. The assessee be given opportunity of being heard. Even otherwise, insertion o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s ascorbic acid vide letter dated 15/08/2008 and 1000 kgs on 12/08/2008, whereas, in the case of standard pharmaceutical, 500 kgs in the month of August and 750 kgs in the month of September. The assessee did not show any purchases in the month of August and September of ascorbic acid. The Assessing Officer found defects in the books of accounts as there was suppression of sales in comparison to raw material purchased, therefore, the books were rejected, being, found unreliable. From the quantit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

no merit in the contention as sufficient opportunity was provided to the assessee during assessment proceedings as well as during first appellate stage. Even it is presumed that lesser time was provided during assessment proceedings, nothing prevented the assessee to file necessary details before the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as before this Tribunal. The assessee is merely harping that proper opportunity was not provided. The assessee has to explain as to how opportunity w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

The assessee is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 30/12/2011 of the ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai. Ground no. 1, 3 and 6 out of the grounds of appeal were not pressed by the ld. counsel for the assessee, Shri C.N. Vaze, therefore, these grounds are dismissed as not pressed. 2. The next ground i.e. no. 2, pertains to disallowing service charges paid for procurement of raw material amounting to ₹ 19,36,700/- on the ground that no TDS was deducted from the said amount. The crux of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ne the claim of the assessee. 2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In view of the certificate of the accountant under first proviso to subsection (1) of section 201 certifying furnishing of return of income and payment of tax, etc, we remand this issue to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer to examine the factual matrix and then decide in accordance with law. The assessee be given opportunity of being heard. Even otherwise, insertion of se .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

centage of process loss and adding ₹ 96,98,214/- to the income of the assessee on the ground that the sales were suppressed. The ld. counsel for the assessee, challenged the addition firstly on the plea that proper opportunity of being heard was not provided to the assessee and secondly it was contended that there was no suppressed sale. On the other hand, the ld. DR, defended the conclusion arrived at in the impugned order. 3.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the mat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on of raw material. As per the Revenue, the assessee did not file the necessary details and keep on delaying the proceedings. The Assessing Officer found following discrepancies in the details furnished by the assessee:- S. No. Particulars Quantity as per Annexure-A Quantity as per Annexure-B Difference 1 Ferric Chloride 6418.47 0 6418.47 2 Sodium Propyl Paraben 3.44 0 3.44 3 Sodium Methyl Paraben 9.9 9 0.9 4 Calcium Carbonate 3000 0 3000 5 Ascorbic Acid 3568.06 619.64 2948.42 The Assessing Offi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version