TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 200X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see has filed the present appeal. Assessee-firm, engaged in the business of trading in Computer Systems, components and peripherals and other allied services, filed its return of income on 13. 10. 2010, declaring total income at Rs. NIL. It filed a revised return on 29. 09. 2011 showing income of ₹ 38, 79, 76, 980/-. A revised return of income was filed on 30. 09. 2011, declaring total income of ₹ 38, 26, 36, 760/-. The Assessing Officer (AO)completed the assessment, u/s. 143(3) of the Act, on 27. 02. 2013, determining the income of the assessee at ₹ 38. 55 Crores. 2. The effective Ground of appeal is about addition of ₹ 11, 57, 884/- made by the AO in respect of purchases. During the course of assessment proceedi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t assessee had admitted the fact of purchasing goods from MI, that it was regular practice in the business that when certain bogus bills were obtained journal entries would be made, that only entry in the books of accounts did not establish that actual delivery of goods had taken place, that Proprietor of MI had admitted before the sales tax authorities that he had never supplied goods, that he had issued accommodation bills only, that payments through cheques was not a conclusive evidence of purchase of goods. Finally, he held that purchases made from MI of ₹ 11. 57 lakhs were not genuine and added the said sum to the total income of the assessee. 3. Before the First Appellate Authority (FAA) the assessee submitted that it had sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he held that purchases made by the assessee were not genuine. 5. During the course of hearing before us, the Authorised Representative (AR) argued that the addition was made on the basis of the statements recorded by the sales tax authorities, that in the statement the proprietor of MI did not mention the name of the assessee, that payment was made through banking channels, the supplier of the goods was assessed to tax, that all the details and documentary evidences were made available to the AO. He referred to the cases of Rajeev G. Kalathil(ITANo. 6727/Mum/2012, dated 20. 08. 2014, A. Y. 2009-10);Shri Rajkumar Agarwal(ITA No. 5233/M/2013, dated 10. 04. 2015, A. Y. 2010-11);Mohammedi Z. Kanchwala (ITA No. 3834/M/2013, dated 06. 05. 201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assessee. In our opinion the order of the FAA can be reversed only on the basis of non observance of principles of natural justice. However, we would like to discuss the merits of the case also. The assessee had discharged it s onus to prove the genuineness of the purchase of the goods. The sales made by the assessee were accepted in toto by the AO. Documentary evidences produced by the assessee were not rebutted by AO/the FAA. The FAA had not given any reason for rejecting the various documents. Both the authorities have gone only by the enquiries by the Sales tax Department. The information received from the Maharashtra Govt. was a good starting point for making further enquiries. But, the AO instead of making enquiries rejected t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case under appeal, we are of the opinion that the order of the FAA does not suffer from any legal infirmity and there are not sufficient evidence on file to endorse the view taken by the AO. So, confirming the order of the FAA, we decide ground no. 1 against the AO. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we hold that by submitting documentary evidence of purchase, consumption and sale of computer components the assessee had discharged its burden of proof. The AO had not produced any evidence that could prove the non genuineness of the transaction. The case laws relied upon by the AR support the view taken by us. Therefore, reversing the order of the FAA, we deci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
