9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 340X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n ITA No. 2386/Kol/2016 for the A.Y 2012-13 by the revenue. 4. The only issue in this appeal is to be decided as to whether the CIT-A is justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,93,79,530/- made on account of difference in purchase made by the AO violating Rule 46A of the IT Rules 1962 in the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. The ld. DR submits that the AO found difference in purchase of goods. For failing to establish the genuineness by producing any supporting documents i.e ledger and proof of payments etc, the AO added an amount of Rs. 2,93,79,530/- to the total income of assesse. He also submits the CIT-A deleted the said addition taking into considerations the submissions of assesse without affording any opportunity to the AO for verification of re-conciliation statements filed by the assesse before the CIT-A. The ld.DR relied on the order of the AO. 6. On the other hand, the ld. AR submits that the assesse filed reconciliation of purchase by its letter dt. 20-03-2015 before the AO. But, however, without considering the same, the AO arbitrarily added the entire purchase to the total income of assesse. The ld.AR referred to submissions made before the CIT-A in the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2,93,79,530 has been disallowed out of purchases. It is submitted that all the accounts of the appellant are fully reconciled. An itemwise and partywise reconciliation statement is submitted herewith marked Annexure - C. As this is fresh statement submitted before your honour, the appellant requests you to accept the same. It is submitted that the purchases having been fully reconciled, the act of the learned A.O disallowing a sum of Rs. 2,93,79,530.00 is wrong and it is prayed that the same may be allowed in appeal. Later on the appellant was informed telephonically, by the learned A.O. that your honour asked for a remand report on the appellant submission and the appellant was accordingly asked to reconcile the advances vis-a-vis purchases of NGR Wheat along with the supporting evidence. The case was adjourned to 5th September,2016. The Appellant in response to said requisition filed a letter alongwith all the relevant note sheets. The said letter read as follows:- "This refers to the discussion during the course of hearing of Remand Proceedings on 2910812016, wherein we were asked to reconcile the difference of Rs. 2,78,59,583 and produce necessary evidence of advances. In this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... final reconciliation statement after considering the above clerical errors should be as follows:- Purchase as per Trading Account 3,75,48,63,298.00 Add:- Credit Figure in Purchase Ledger 34,21,864.00 (as per para 1 (d) above) Less :- Reversal of Double Entry Dakshin Dinajpur 1,39,60,000.00 (as per para 1 (f) above) Less :- Reversal of Double Entry Damdama 6,07,448.00 (as per para 1 (f) above) Less :- Total ITC & Bank Charge Adjustment in Creditors Ledger 33,07,485.00 (as per para 1 (h) above) Less :- Cash Purchase not included purchase list submitted 3,56.112.00 (as per para 1 (e) above) Total 3,77,58,03,983.00 Purchase Above Rs. 1,00,000.00 3,38,11,06,453.00 (as per para 1( a) above) Purchase Below Rs. 1. 00, 000. 00 5,14,772.00 Purchase from K.B.Enterprise wrongly show as Rs. 14,26,062 instead of Rs. 16,12,708 1,86,646.00 ( as per para 1(b) above) Adjusted Against Advance Confiscated Goods 13.5% 53,13,163.00 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... transaction which were also asked for submission at the time of assessment. Assessee submitted a written explanation (enclosed) of the above mentioned amount. Wherein he explained that due to various clerical mistakes the difference had occurred. He had submitted only reconciliation statement without any documentary evidence like bill vouchers against the correct amount. In the absence of such documentary evidence the undersigned is not in agreement with the view of the assessee." 3.3. The assessee filed a rejoinder on the remand report in the following: We acknowledge receipt of copy of remand report sent by learned Assessing Officer, Circle-40, Kolkata in our above appeal case. In this connection we like to submit that at the time of hearing of the case in the remand proceeding we were asked to reconcile the advance of Rs. 2,78,59,583/- and submit the supporting evidence. The remand proceeding was adjourned to 05/09/2016. We duly reconciled the said advance end submitted copies of note sheets for sanction of the said advances and its subsequent adjustment. As already informed to your honour. ours is a state level consumer's cooperative society and engaged in implementa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt. In the absence of such documentary evidence the undersigned is not in agreement with the view of the assessee." The appellant in their rejoinder to the remand report has stated that "We duly reconciled the said advance and submitted copies of note sheets for sanction of the said advances and its subsequent adjustment. As already informed to your honour, ours is a state level consumer's cooperative society and engaged in implementation of various relief schemes of the Government. Government of West Bengal is our major shareholder and other shares are held by district level cooperative societies. We cannot enter into any transaction without preparing proper note sheet and obtain proper sanction of the authorities at various levels. These note sheets are highly reliable and scrutinized from time to time by various Government authorities including C.A.G. The learned assessing officer, however, did not look into these note sheets at all and insisted to produce the related bills. However, because of high volume of transactions, the bills are stored in several gunny bags and it was not possible to trace and produce the same at this short notice. The learned Assessing officer, how ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
