TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 228X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther agitated before higher forum by the revenue. Hence on this ground it cannot be said that order of the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the assessee. Addition u/s 68 - lack of enquiry v/s no enquiry - Held that:- As found that before the ld AO the assessee filed the confirmation of the Modern Chemicals stating PAN, amount of outstanding as on 31.03.2008 of ₹ 1367088/-. Such confirmation is placed at Page 138 of the Paper Book dated 02.06.2010 identically with M/s. Paswara Chemicals Ltd also the assessee submitted the confirmation stating its PAN No. Therefore there is definitely an inquiry made by the ld AO with respect to outstanding creditors. Therefore it cannot be said that it is a case of no enquiry by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 010 u / s 143 ( 3 ) had been passed by proper application of mind . c ) The Id . CIT had either ignored or had not properly appreciated the facts stated and the case law relied upon by the assessee in response to notice u / s 263 as submitted before the Id . CIT, which also vitiates the impugned order . d ) Various observations made by the Id . CIT in the impugned order u / s 263 are either incorrect or are legally untenable . The Id . CIT had no jurisdiction to partly set aside the assessment order without considering appellant's submissions with regard to each and every issue raised by him in notice u / s 263 . 2 . That without prejudice to Ground No . 1 above, the following ob ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation, to Assessee's case . 3. Though assessee has raised three grounds of appeal, however their main grievance is that the ld CIT has erred in exercising jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as the order originally passed u/s 143(3) of the Act by ACIT, Circle-2, Meerut dated 22.10.2010 was neither erroneous and is not prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The assessee company is engaged in the business of export and import of manufacturing petroleum products. It filed its return of income on 07.08.2008 declared income of ₹ 1085486/- and subsequently on that return assessment was made u/s 143(3) on 22.10.2010 accepting the return of income. Subsequently the ld CIT issued a show cause notice dated 04.03.2013 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of fixed asset of ₹ 24596119/- only ₹ 620000/- has been doubted. He submitted that the assessee preferred appeal against the order of the ld AO before the first appellate authority against the order passed u/s 143(3) rws 263 of the Act and The ld First appellate authority deleted the addition of ₹ 620000/- out of investment made in the fixed assets, which has been accepted by revenue as the above addition is held to be made only on conjectures and surmises it was not sustained. Therefore on second count also the assertion u/s 263 fails. With respect to sundry creditors the addition of ₹ 15966490/- has been made u/s 68 on the direction of the ld CIT. With respect to the addition of ₹ 15966490/- on account of su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase laws relied upon by the ld CIT does not apply to the facts of the case before us. Therefore he vehemently submitted that the ld CIT has erred in exercising power u/s 263 of the Act. 5. The ld DR relied upon the order of the AO and submitted that there is no evidence of letter which are filed by the AO or not. He therefore submitted that in absence of this the ld CIT has correctly exercised her power u/s 263 of the Act. 6. We have carefully considered the rival contentions. Apparently original assessment was made u/s 143(3) of the act where assessee produced the books of account and vouchers and they were test checked by the AO as it was emphatically mentioned in the assessment order that after discussion and examination of various ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bsequent documents it submitted copies of ledger account of those parties and further the confirmation of those parties by submitting the copies of the account of the assessee from their books of accounts. In view of this it is apparent that during the course of assessment proceedings the ld AO has examined the outstanding creditors of the assessee along with confirmation as on 31.03.2008. In view this we do not agree with the order of the ld CIT who has held that the assessee has filed the confirmation but heavy onus lies on the assessee to explain of amount of credit appearing in the books of account and therefore she held that such amount to be liable to be added u/s 68 of the Act. Vide letters dated 27.08.2010, 20.10.2010 and 09.06.2010 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
