TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1266X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... For The Revenue : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, D.R ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-32, Mumbai, dated 12.05.2015, which in itself arises from the order passed by the A.O under Sec.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short Act ), dated 29.12.2011. The assessee assailing the order of the CIT(A) had raised before us the following grounds of appeal:- 1. The Learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD) (Appeal) erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 2,09,83,520/- under section 68 as unexplained cash credit. 2. The Learned Pr. CIT (OSD) (A) failed to appreciate the mandate of section 68 of the Act, where once the assessee has discharged his initial burden of proof then the addition is unwarranted. The burden of proof then shif ts to the assessing officer, who has not discharged the same at all. 3. The Learned PR CIT (OSD) (A) has failed to appreciate that the appellant has fully discharged his onus of proving the nature source of the receipts in his bank account along with necessary explanation and when the assessees explanation was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from one single party, i.e. M/s Equichem Enterprises. However, a perusal of the ING Vysya Bank Account of the assessee revealed that it was in receipt of an amount aggregating to ₹ 2,09,83,520/- from parties other than the aforesaid party, viz. M/s A.V. Forgings Pvt. Ltd to which the entire sales were made during the year under consideration. The records of the assessee revealed that it had received amount of ₹ 94,00,000/- and ₹ 1,15,83,520/- from two concerns, viz. M/s Shree Ganesh Enterprises and M/s Astec life Sciences Ltd, respectively. It was further observed by the A.O that not only the assessee had no business dealing with the aforementioned parties, but rather, even the aforesaid receipts were not shown by the assessee as loans or advances received from them. The assessee on being called upon to show cause by the A.O as to why the aforesaid amounts so received by it may not be treated as his unexplained income for the year under consideration, though placed on record a self declaration that the said respective amounts represented his sale receipts, but however, failed to furnish any other documentary evidence which could corroborate the said claim. The A.O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om whom they were purchasing various products during the year under consideration, that the aforesaid payment on its behalf was made to the assessee. The aforementioned parties, viz. M/s Shree Ganesh Enterprises and M/s Astec Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd. further placed on record the copies of letters which were issued by M/s A.V. Forging Pvt. Ltd. asking them to make the payment on its behalf to the assessee concern. The A.O after perusing the aforesaid information which was placed on his record during the course of the remand proceedings, observed on a perusal of the bank account No.533011015910 of the M/s Epsilon, i.e the assessee, that the aforementioned parties i.e Shree Ganesh Enterprises and M/s Astec Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd had during the year under consideration made the payments to the assessee concern, as under: Sr. No. Name of the parties Amount credited to the M/s Epsilon products (assessee)) (A/c No. 533011015910) Transaction date 1. Shree Ganesh Enterprises (A/c No. 533011009803) ₹ 90,00,000/- ₹ 3,00,000/- ₹ 1,00,000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bank account to M/s Shree Ganesh Enterprises, submitted that the said payments were made as per the directions of the supplier of the assessee, viz. M/s Equichem Enterprises, which had called upon the assessee to make the payment to the aforesaid party on its behalf. The assessee in order to drive home his aforesaid contention, placed on record the confirmation of M/s Equichem Enterprises, which evidenced that the making of payment by the assessee to M/s Shree Genesh Enterprises was as per its direction and behest. 4. The CIT(A) after deliberating on the contentions advanced by the assessee before him and perusing the remand report of the A.O, observed that the amount of ₹ 94,00,000/- and ₹ 1,15,83,520/- received by the assessee was not a simple case of payment received towards sale consideration. The CIT(A) held a conviction that the fact that the aforesaid amount of ₹ 94,00,000/- and ₹ 1,15,83,520/- had found its way back to one of party viz. M/s Shree Ganesh Enterprises, raised serious doubts as regards the veracity of the explanation advanced by the assessee in respect of the nature of the aforesaid transactions. The CIT(A) observed that if at all th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from M/s Shree Ganesh Enterprises and M/s Astec Life Science Ltd., respectively, had submitted that the same formed part of the sale consideration of ₹ 7,14,63,477/- which was received by it from its buyer M/s A.V. Forging Pvt. Ltd., as under: ( i) Receipts against sales of ₹ 7,14,63,477/- to M/s A.V. Forging Pvt. Ltd:- Sr. No. Particulars Amount 1. Ganesh Enterprises 94,00,000/- 2. Astec Enterprises 1,15,83,520/- 3. Paid on my behalf by M/s A.V. Forging Pvt. Ltd. to M/s Equichem Enterprises. 5,03,99,957/- We further find that the assessee on being confronted with the amount aggregating to ₹ 2,07,83,520/- which was transferred to the bank account M/s Shree Ganesh Enterprises on two occasions, viz. ₹ 90,00,000/- and ₹ 1,15,83,520/- on 01.01.2009 and 30,03.2009, respectively, had submitted that the aforesaid amounts were paid to the said party, as per the directions of its supplier concern, viz. M/s Equichem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... turn of the income of M/s Shree Ganesh Enterprises and M/s Astec Life Sciences Ltd. for AY 2009-10; (viii) copy of the VAT return; (ix) copies of the letters issue by M/s A.V. forging Pvt. Ltd. to M/s Shree Ganesh Enterprises and M/s Astec Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., asking them to make payment on its behalf to the assessee concern, viz. M/s Epsilon Products; and (x) confirmation of M/s A.V. forging that as per its request M/s Shree Ganesh Enterprises and M/s Astec Life Sciences Ltd. who were his debtors had made the payments on his behalf to the assessee, substantially prima facie evidences the genuineness of the transaction, which thus cannot be summarily brushed aside and discarded. We further find that while for the assessee had received an amount aggregating to ₹ 2,09,83,520/- from the aforementioned parties, viz. M/s Shree Ganesh Enterprises and M/s Astec Life Science Ltd, while for an amount of ₹ 2,05,83,520/- out of the aforesaid amounts so received was transferred to M/s Shree Ganesh Enterprises, therefore, the observations of the lower authorities that the same amount which was received from the aforementioned parties had found its way back to one of the said p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
