9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 1380X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3(6) were issued to six parties. The Ward Inspector submitted report stating that out of six, five parties are not available in the given address. Therefore, the assessee was required to submit details in respect of purchases made from those parties alongwith stock register, delivery challans etc. However, nobody attended nor produce any details as called for including the parties for verification. Thus, the Assessing Officer concluded that assessee failed to establish the genuineness of the purchased claimed. Thus, he disallowed the purchases as bogus. 3.1. Similarly, the Assessing Officer called for details of purchases from M/s. Shreenath Electricals and Shri Mohamed Kashim and asked to produce the confirmations from the parties. Though assessee produced details, parties were not produced for verification. The Inspector in his report submitted that notices issued u/s. 133(6) to the address given in respect of Ms. Anita Girish Akola, Prop. M/s. Shreenath Electricals and Shri Mohamed Kashim are not available at the given address. Therefore the Assessing Officer required the assessee to produce these parties for verification. Since the assessee could not produce these parties, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s report. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the assessee has furnished all the particulars specified by the Assessing Officer to discharge its obligation but the Assessing Officer never bothered to verify various aspects such as mode of payments, existence of PAN and VAT No., nature of items and its consumption etc. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submits that except jumping to the conclusion mainly based on the fact that the address of the creditors are not verifiable, the Assessing Officer has not established that such purchases are either bogus or inflated. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that assessee firm has maintained regular books of accounts and the said accounts are subject matter of audit u/s. 44AB where independent, qualified Chartered Accountant and the auditors have not pointed out any defects therefore he submits that the purchases and the labour payments cannot be treated as bogus simply because the Inspector has given a report stating that parties are not available at the given address. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that confirmations of the parties are available at page-40 of the Paper book and further he submits that at pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... representative and the stands taken by the Assessing Officer. The AO has primarily formed his surmises on the basis of Ward Inspector's report who was unable to serve notice u/s. 133(6) to the aforesaid parties. However, the appellant firm had filed confirmation of accounts, PAN, lncome Tax Return s etc. instead of conducting verification based on the above information, the AO disallowed the purchases on the ground that the appellant did not submit bank account, income tax return and new addresses of the parties. In any case, it is seen from the copies of confirmation that all the payments by the appellant were made either by DD or by account payee cheques. If the AO doubted the genuineness of purchases, he ought to have conducted verification with the bank to find out as to who encashed the cheques. Without doing this exercise, he required the appellant to furnish the bank account and income tax returns of the purchase cases which the appellant could not obtain in certain cases. However, the appellant has filed bank account and income tax return copies of certain parties wherever the same could be obtained. From the table given in para 4 above, it is seen that the confirmati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ition of Rs. 1.04 crore. The detail of purchases to the tune of Rs. 1.16 crore is incorporated in the impugned order along with remarks given by the. assessee. A common feature as prevailing in respect of all these parties is that the copies of confirmations of these parties have invariably been made available. For example, the first party is M/s.Akshat Enterprises from whom purchases worth Rs. 27.57 lakh were made. A copy of confirmation from this party is available on page 182 of the paper book. This confirmation is not only duly signed by M/s.Akshat Enterprises but also gives permanent account number of the said party along with mobile number of the concerned person. Similar position is obtaining in the other cases also. Apart from that, the assessee has also furnished income-tax returns with other attaching documents in respect of 3 parties. Under these circumstances we are unable to appreciate the contention of the learned Departmental Representative that the assessee failed to discharge the onus cast upon it to prove the genuineness of the purchases. Once confirmation from the party together with its permanent account number etc. is provided, the onus on the assessee stands d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Central Board Direct Taxes New Delhi the 10th December, 2015 Subject: Revision of monetary limits for filing of appeals by the Department before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and High Courts and SLP before Supreme Court - measures for reducing litigation - Reg - Reference is invited to Board's instruction No 5/2014 dated 10.07.2014 wherein monetary limits and other conditions for filing departmental appeals (in Income-tax matters) before Appellate Tribunal and High Courts and SLP before the Supreme Court were specified. 2. In supersession of the above instruction, it has been decided by the Board that departmental appeals may be filed on merits before Appellate Tribunal and High Courts and SLP before the Supreme Court keeping in view the monetary limits and conditions specified below. 3. Henceforth, appeals/ SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder: - S. No Appeals in Income-tax matters Monetary Limit (in Rs) 1. Before Appellate Tribunal 10,00,000/- 2. Before High Court 20,00,000/- 3. Before Supreme Court 25,00,000/- It is clarified that an appeal should not be filed merely ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
