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 →

The Income Tax Officer, Ward – I (4) , Vellore Versus Smt. Punitha Balakrishnan and The Income Tax Officer, Ward – I (4) , Vellore Versus Shri N. Balakrishnan

2016 (5) TMI 246 - ITAT CHENNAI

Addition towards inflation of purchase of rice - Held that:- What is to be seen is whether the assessee has purchased the paddy or not. In this case disallowance was made only on the ground that the assessee has not produced the bills and vouchers. The fact remains that the assessee has produced bought note which contains the names of the farmers and their village names. By referring to the village name and name of the farmers, one can easily identify the individual from whom the paddy was purch .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tched. Paddy is not a perishable commodity. The paddy harvested by the agriculturists can be stored for a reasonable period of time. At the best, the moisture content may be reduced by passage of time. The paddy is not a perishable commodity. Therefore, merely because the bills were raised during the period when there was no harvest, that cannot be a reason to doubt the purchase itself. Rule 6DD relaxes the rigour of provisions of Section 40A(3) of the Act with regard to payment made to agricult .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

assessee.

Unexplained cash deposit in bank account - Held that:- The CIT(Appeals), by following his own order in the assessee's own case for assessment year 2007-08, found that the net available cash as on 31.03.2007 was ₹ 5,23,773/-. Therefore, the CIT(Appeals) presumed that the assessee could explain the source for making investment in the bank account. As rightly submitted by the Ld.counsel for the assessee, this fact needs to be verified. Accordingly, the orders of the lower .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e claim of the assessee only on the ground that the balance sheet does not reflect the loan/advance said to be given by the assessee to his wife Smt. Punitha Balakrishnan. The fact remains that the loan was given through four cheques on four different dates. This fact is not disputed by the Revenue. When the amount was transferred from the bank by means of cheques, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that rejection of claim of the assessee only on the ground that the balance sheet does no .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

) -VII, dated 30.12.2013, in respect of two independent assessees, for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09. Since common issue arises for consideration in these appeals, we heard all these appeals together and disposing of the same by this common order. 2. In I.T.A. Nos.991 & 992/Mds/2014, the admitted tax is less than ₹ 10 lakhs. In view of the circular of CBDT in Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10.12.2015, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that these two appeals filed by the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rified that the deposit of ₹ 33,78,600/- was purported to be in connection with Trading, Profit & Loss account of the assessee. The assessee claimed before the Assessing Officer that he has purchased paddy from farmers for a sum of ₹ 8,07,747/-. The assessee has maintained bought notes wherein the names of the farmers and the dates of purchase were said to be mentioned. According to the Ld. D.R., the bought notes were not produced before the Assessing Officer. It was produced onl .....

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 not produced before the Assessing Officer. Referring to the assessment order, more particularly page 5, para 1.3, the Ld.counsel submitted that the Assessing Officer in categorical terms says that the bought note purchase bills examined . However, the Assessing Officer has added that it does not contain complete names and address of the farmers. Referring to the dates mentioned in the bought note, the Assessing Officer observed that the period of yielding is different and the farmers could not .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n the gross profit of the ratio would go to 52% which is abnormal. Referring to the export made by the assessee to the extent of ₹ 33,78,600/-, the Ld.counsel submitted that unless purchase was made, the assessee could not have exported the rice. 6. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The Assessing Officer doubted the purchase of paddy to the extent of ₹ 8,07,747/-. It is not in dispute that the paddy was purc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ir agricultural produce. This fact which prevails in this country cannot be ignored by the Income-tax Department, when the agricultural produces are purchased from the agriculturists. What is to be seen is whether the assessee has purchased the paddy or not. In this case disallowance was made only on the ground that the assessee has not produced the bills and vouchers. The fact remains that the assessee has produced bought note which contains the names of the farmers and their village names. By .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tention of the Assessing Officer appears to be that the farmers could not preserve their paddy and sell in a later stage. The argument of the Assessing Officer is farfetched. Paddy is not a perishable commodity. The paddy harvested by the agriculturists can be stored for a reasonable period of time. At the best, the moisture content may be reduced by passage of time. The paddy is not a perishable commodity. Therefore, merely because the bills were raised during the period when there was no harve .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ained by the assessee. In those circumstances, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the CIT(Appeals) has rightly deleted the addition of ₹ 8,07,747/-. 8. The next ground of appeal is with regard to disallowance of ₹ 4,55,000/-. 9. Dr. B. Nischal, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the assessee has disclosed opening cash balance of ₹ 5,23,773/- by way of cash deposit in the assessee s bank account. The assessee has not furnished any cash flow statemen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

i G. Baskar, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, submitted that there was an addition of ₹ 4,55,000/- towards unexplained cash deposit in bank account. The Ld.counsel further submitted that the CIT(Appeals) deleted the addition accepting the available funds to the extent of ₹ 5,23,773/- as on 31.03.2007. But, this fact needs to be verified. Further, the Ld.counsel submitted that the matter may be remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification. 11. We have considered .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e orders of the lower authorities are set aside and the issue of addition of ₹ 5,23,773/- is remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall re-examine the issue in the light of availability of funds as on 31.03.2007 and thereafter decide the matter in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 12. The next ground of appeal is with regard to addition of ₹ 21,00,000/- towards unexplained loans and advances. 13. Dr. B. Nisch .....

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 loan. Accordingly, made an addition of ₹ 21,00,000/-. On appeal by the assessee, the CIT(Appeals) found that the loan was given by the assessee to his wife by way of cheques. The CIT(Appeals) found that since the loan was advanced through banking channel, merely because the loan was not reflected in the balance sheet that cannot be a reason to disallow the claim of the assessee. According to the Ld. D.R., the fact that the loan said to be given to the assessee s wife Smt. Punitha Balak .....

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