TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 653X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d purchases has been paid by account payee cheque in April and May, 2015 and now there is no outstanding amount against the said supplier. Regarding the other details submitted by the assessee, namely copy of Ledger amount and purchase bill of M/s Mahaveer Textiles, copy of the confirmation of the amount sent by M/s Mahaveer Textile Mills to the department and the fact that the materials so purchased form part of the turnover and which has been exported, there is no finding by the Assessing Officer as to reasons for nonacceptance of the said documents and in absence of that, the stand taken by the Revenue cannot be accepted. Merely non-appearance of the supplier in absence of any other corroborate evidence cannot be a basis to justify the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts. However, as the assessee could not produce the said party, the entire purchase transaction was held to be nongenuine and purchases of ₹ 13,39,969/- was treated as bogus and added to the income of the assessee. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before ld. CIT(A) and submitted that it has purchased raw material from M/s Mahaveer Textile Mill worth of ₹ 13,39,969/- in F.Y 2006-07 and the payment was still outstanding. During the course of appellate proceeding for AY 2008- 09, the appellant provided statement of accounts, bills signed by the supplier, confirmation of account by the supplier. The ld. CIT(A) without going into the merits of the case noted that since purchases do not pertain to A.Y 2008-09 but pertain to pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roceedings and oblige. Further, the Assessing Officer drawn reference to the assessment proceeding for AY 2008-09 and finally held that the assessee was accorded ample opportunity to produce the party so as to establish genuineness of the transactions claimed to have been made with the said party. However, the assessee failed to prove the genuineness of the expenses claimed by it inspite of providing all the reasonable opportunity. The AO finally held that in view of conclusive evidence brought on record, it can be safely held that the expenses of ₹ 13,39,969/- debited by the assessee as payable to M/s Mahaveer Textile Mills are bogus which deserves to be disallowed and was added back to the declared income to the assessee. 4. Bei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld. CIT(A) and has submitted as under:- The appellant is running a partnership concern in the name of M/s Beauty Tex (Florals India) doing manufacturing and 100% exports of embroidered Cloth, Curtain and made-ups 1. Books of accounts of appellant are audited, vouched and verifiable. Books of accounts has not been rejected u/s 145 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and trading results, Exports Turnover, Gross Profit, Opening stock, Closing Stock etc has been accepted as it is without any addition/disallowance. Copy of return, audited balance-sheet is at PB 1-51 2. Total purchases during the year is ₹ 3.95 Crores out of which purchases from one party M/s Mahaveer Textiles was ₹ 13,39,969. Copy of ledger account and purchases bi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2008-09 29.34% 6. In AY 2008-09 (PB-127) and 2010-11 (PB 139) in the appellant s own case, addition for bogus purchases was deleted, appeal was allowed and it has been held by Hon ble ITAT Jaipur bench, Jaipur that: The exports of the assessee are not doubted. Moreover the books of account of the assessee have not been rejected on account of unverifiable purchases and without rejecting the books, no such trading addition can be made. In case any addition is to be made after rejection of the books, only past history has to be applied. Since the past history of the assessee is almost comparable with this year, there is no need to disturb the declared results. 7. Further, reliance placed on follo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AY 2008-09 or the reassessment proceedings for the impunged AY 2007-08. The only grievance of the Assessing Officer is that the assessee has failed to produce the party so as to establish genuineness of the transaction and secondly, no payment has been made to the party till the year end. The ld.CIT(A) while confirming the disallowance has stated that though confirmation has been obtained from the party, however, a simple confirmation is not sufficient to establish the fact of purchase without elaborating what more is required from the assessee to justify its claim. Regarding non appearance of the supplier, the assessee has submitted that the supplier was based in Delhi and he has denied coming to Jaipur but at the same time, he has sent it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
