TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 1262X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de to transport creditors through bank. The balance of small amount has been written off. The payment has been made through bank, confirmation letters and income tax returns in this regard have not been considered by the Ld. CIT(A). In respect of confirmation letter when the assessee paid this amount through banking channel, we are of the view that this party do exists at a relevant time. The Department has also accepted the written off for the same party. Therefore, in our opinion, no addition can be made u/s. 41(1) of the Act. In respect of Aniketh Enterprises, Hanuman Traders & Veerabhadreshwara Enterprises - The assessee has made the payment through RTGS, necessary information was given to the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A), therefore in our opinion, no addition can be made. The assessee has also filed the acknowledgement of the copy of the return filed by those parties. If the transport contractor had left the residence and they were not traceable, it is proved from the record that they are transport contractors, therefore in our opinion, no addition is required, hence, we delete the same. - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 399/PNJ/2014 - - - Dated:- 9-3-2015 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs Vinayaka Enterprises ₹ 35 Lac., Hanuman Traders ₹ 65 Lac., Aniketh Enterprises ₹ 65 Lac. Veerabhadreshwara Enterprises ₹ 35 Lac. 4. The matter was carried to the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee, therefore assessee is in appeal before us. 5. Learned AR has filed the written submission, which reads as under:- I write to submit that M/s Ramgopal Minerals, Hospet, incurred expenditure towards transportation as and when it was required and the transport contractors issued bills in the month of March as they were insisted for accounts purposes thought they were promised of payment in the month of April 2010. These contractors were paid through bank in the month of April.2010, confirmation letters were obtained from them, while closing the account and copies of the same were produced at the time of assessment. The AO issued Notice U/s 133(6) but they were returned by the postal authorities. During the course of the appeal the copies of same confirmation letters were produced before the learned CIT (Appeals) VI. The commissioner desired that some more evidences may be tried. At this point of time the Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st of the transport contractors are illiterates who learnt signature with great difficulty and it is the human probability that such persons do not maintain consistency in signature. The learned CIT (Appeals) VI failed to consider this human probability. Copies of acknowledgement of Returns of Income in the cases of R.Ashok Kumar, Veerabhadreshwara Enterprises; L.G.Raghava Reddy, Aniketh Enterprises and A. Chandrashekhar Reddy proprietor Hanuman Traders, have been obtained and furnished to the learned CIT(Appeals)VI which are available in the appeal memo. In respect of C.M.Veereshaiah Proprietor Vinayaka Enterprises, copy of acknowledgment could not be obtained but it is confirmed by the office of the ACIT Bellary that return of income was E-filed by the Vinayaka Enterprises, on 15.10.2010 under the acknowledgement No 172808510151010. In the above circumstances it is submitted that with evidences furnished as above the expenditure deserves favorable consideration and further that these contractors having filed the returns of income, the payments made to them have suffered tax in their returns of income. Not allowing the expenditure in our case would result in double taxat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in our opinion, no addition can be made u/s. 41(1) of the Act. 9. In respect of Aniketh Enterprises, the assessee has produced copy of ledger account at page Nos. 20 21, which reveals that amount has been paid by the assessee through RTGS. The assessee has filed the confirmation letter of the said party and also filed copy of income tax return. Therefore in our opinion, no addition can be made. In respect of Hanuman Traders Veerabhadreshwara Enterprises, the assessee has submitted that these are the transport creditors and payment has been made to both the parties through RTGS. The parties do exist with the Income Tax Department and they have also filed the return of income. We find that the assessee has incurred the expenditure towards transportation and transport contractors received the bills in the month of March and payments were made through banking channel in 2010 and confirmation letters were obtained from them and closing account copy of the same was produced at the time of assessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer has issued notice u/s. 133(6) of the Act, which was returned back by the postal authorities. We find that the Assessing Officer should have insisted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
