9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 179X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT (A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 81,50,175/- made on a/c of cash deposits despite of fact that the genuineness and creditworthiness of the same was not proved at the time of assessment. 4. Whether the CIT(A) has erred by ignoring that none of the invoices have details to whom the material had been sold. At the place of consignee only 'Cash' is written, which is not sufficient to verify the genuineness & creditworthiness of purchasers. Being an assessee whose accounts to be audited u/s 44AB of the I.T. Act is required to maintain details of all sellers/purchasers alongwith their addresses, PAN so that verification of genuineness of transaction can be done. 5. Whether the CIT(A) has erred by ignoring the cash deposits, deposited in rounded of Rupees in lakhs (000000) in the Bank A/Cs related to daily sales of "Export Surplus Fabrics" in the month of Feb 2011/March 2011. 6. Whether the CIT(A) has erred by ignoring that the assessee thus not utter a single word on maintenance of cash register. Besides not maintaining the cash register, the assessee also do not issue cash memo to purchasers and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther, the assessee also submitted that the reasons for shoot up of sales in the month of February, 2011, because the assessed is dealing in the Export Surplus Fabrics, Main buyers of the assessee are petty fabrication and shopkeepers. Sales of these fabrics ere never constant. It mainly depends on the order with the exporters." 4.1 Thereafter, the AO asked the assessee to produce each and every bills of cash alongwith name & contact details of the party concerned. In response, the assessee furnished sales accounts & invoice for the month of March, 2011. From the sales account and invoices submitted by the assessee, the AO observed as under: "(a) All invoices are on plain paper and not on printed stationery as is the practice in normal courses of business. (b) No details of "Quantity" of item "Export Surplus Fabric" supplied is mentioned in any of the invoice. (c) None of the invoice has "Rates" on which- the material has been supplied. It may be noted that while purchasing goods from Dulari Exports Pvt. Ltd. vide retail invoice dated 04.02.2011, 24.01.2011, 17.01.2011, 10.01.2011, 05.01.2011 etc. all such details are mentioned, but while selling no such details has been quot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t be treated as unexplained cash credit within the meaning of Section 68 of the Act. It was further submitted that the bank account in question represented the duly disclosed bank account of the assessee and the same audited bank account was coming forward from the earlier year. It was stated that the source of deposits in the saving bank account could not be treated to be representing the unexplained cash credit or even the receipts from undisclosed sources because the same was referable to the sales as recorded in the books of M/s N. K. Handa Textiles & Co. dealing in fabrics, in support of the above, the assessee furnished the copies of the sales account as appearing in the ledger in which postings from cash book were recorded on the day-to-day basis and the deposits had been made into Saving Bank Account of the assessee. It was stated that the books were produced before the AO who never disputed that the sales shown in M/s N. K. Handa Textiles & Co., overwhelmingly covered the deposits in the said saving bank account. It was contended that similar deposits from the sale proceeds of fabrics appeared in the O.D. Bank Account with Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. about which there was no dis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... herefore, under the circumstances the sales proceeds of such goods even if in cash could not have been said to be unexplained and added to the assessee's income u/s 68 of the Act. More so, when the cash deposited in the two other bank accounts were not doubted by the AO. Accordingly, the impugned addition made by the AO was deleted. 6. Now the department is in appeal. The ld. Sr. DR strongly supported the order of the AO and reiterated the observation made therein. It was further submitted that the assessee neither maintained the stock register nor produced any evidence and the ld. CIT(A) violated the Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. Therefore, the addition made by the AO was wrongly deleted by the ld. CIT(A). 7. In his rival submissions, the ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the authorities below and further submitted that the assessee maintained the complete details which were furnished to the AO vide letter dated 17.10.2013. A reference was made to page nos. 28 to 32 of the assessee's paper book which is the copy of the said letter wherein in para 6 it has been mentioned that the assessee was maintaining current account with Karur Vysy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
