TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 260X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee for such supply of materials. It is factually incorrect on the part of the ld. AO to conclude that the said trade creditor had confirmed Nil balance as on 31.03.2011 as amount receivable from the assessee. Hence it could be safely concluded that the AO had proceeded to make an addition by treating the concerned sundry creditor as bogus based on incorrect assumption of facts - no addition could be made u/s 68 in respect of a trade creditor. AO had not disputed the purchase of materials made by the assessee from the said sundry creditor and hence the corresponding credit entry i.e. credit to the account of the sundry creditor cannot be doubted by the ld. AO. Thus we direct the ld. AO to delete the addition - Decided in favour of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed that three sundry creditors had reported that some amount was reported by them from the assessee, but had however not confirmed the closing balance figure. Based on this explanation, the ld. AO came to conclusion that the balance confirmation by those parties were Rs. Nil as on 31.03.2011. Accordingly, the ld. AO issued show cause notice to the assessee as to why the balance shown in the form of trade creditors in respect of three parties should not be treated as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. The assessee replied that he has got no comments to offer in respect of the same. Accordingly, the ld. AO strangely sought to tax the closing balance shown in the name of M/s Jaharlal Ghosh in respect of only one creditor in the sum of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15.11.2013 confirming the fact of supply of materials to the assessee during the financial year 2010-11 and had also confirmed the fact that some amount was receivable from the assessee for such supply of materials. This fact is evidenced from page 20 (Bengali Font) of the paper book and page 21 (Translated font) of the paper book filed before us. While this is so, it is factually incorrect on the part of the ld. AO to conclude that the said trade creditor had confirmed Nil balance as on 31.03.2011 as amount receivable from the assessee. Hence it could be safely concluded that the ld. AO had proceeded to make an addition by treating the concerned sundry creditor as bogus based on incorrect assumption of facts. In any case, we hold that no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
