TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 465X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no substance in assessee’s instant argument as it is assessee’s bounden duty to prove of the purchases in issue by way of leading cogent evidences. The fact also remains whole of the assessee’s purchases cannot be treated as bogus since corresponding sales have already been accepted. We hold in these peculiar facts and circumstances that the impugned purchases deserve to be disallowed @ 12.5% only. We therefore direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the impugned disallowance of ₹1,10,17,324/- to the extent 12.5% thereof only in consequential computation. This former substantive ground is partly accepted in above terms. Capital gains addition - treating assessee’s agricultural land sold to be a capital asset - AO completed his best judgment assessment u/s. 144 - HELD THAT:- The assessee could not produce all the relevant details in the lower appellate proceedings as well. We reiterate that we have already restored the former issue back to the Assessing Officer with specific directions. We therefore deem it appropriate that larger interest would be met in case the Assessing Officer adjudicate the instant issue afresh as per law after affording three effective opportunitie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngs u/s 271(1)(c) of the I. T. Act, 1961 has been Initiated separately for concealment of particulars of income. 06. During the appeal stage the appellant / Ld. A.R for the appellant has submitted as under: Hon'ble sir, the Ld. Assessing officer erred In adding ₹ 1,,17,324/- being the amount of sundry creditors and advances received from debtors, stating as unexplained credit to the total income of the assessee. Hon'ble sir, the assessee has filed his return of income and submitted the audited Balance Sheet, Profit Loss Account with Tax Audit Report. Bank Statements and confirmations from some of the creditors, the Ld. AO should have passed the assessment order after taking Info all relevant materials which the Ld. AO has gathered or has in her possession. Even In case of best judgment assessment the Ld. AO should have passed the assessment order taking into accounts the relevant materials and figures submitted to her. The audited Balance Sheet Profit Loss Account together with. Tax Audit Report was in her possession and since the Income Tax Return was filed electronically having all the figures relating to Balance Sheet Profit Loss Account therein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r 2011-12 and added the same to the total income returned for the A.Y 2012-13. 2. During appeal, the Ld A.R for the appellant has submitted that the assessee has tiled his return of income and submitted the audited Balance Sheet, Profit loss Account with Tax Audit Report. It was contended that the Bank Statements and confirmations from, some of the creditors were also submitted. It was argued that therefore, the ld. AO ought to have passed the assessment order after taking into all relevant materials which the Ld. AO has gathered or has in her possession. It was pleaded that even in a case of best judgment assessment the Ld. AO should have passed the assessment order taking Into accounts the relevant materials and figures submitted to her, and that the audited Balance Sheet Profit loss Account together with Tax Audit Report were in her possession and since the Income Tax Return was filed electronically having all the figures relating to Balance Sheet Profit Loss Account therein, there is no reason to say that she could not go though them. It was argued that the assessments are done on the basis of performance of the business of the assessee but the Ld. AO did not go th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal stage, at no point In time has be discharged the onus of giving the basis details such as address for communication, account confirmations etc., to place on record some semblance of identity or genuineness of the parties. It Is not even known whether they were trade creditors for the assessee during the relevant year. Hon'ble Courts have for long held that the onus is cast on the appellant to explain the credits in the books of accounts, otherwise they would remain unexplained, and liable for being disbelieved. Similarly f it Is noticed that in the matter of the amount of ₹ 36,30,597/-which has been claimed by the appellant to be advances received from the debtors (customers), the assessee has not supported such claims either before the Ld.AO or before this forum. 4. In the case of Suresh Kumar T Jain Vs ITO, Ward-2(1), Banalore, the Hon'ble ITAT, Bangalore, Bench-A, reported in [2011] 128 ITD 74 (Bangalore) by their order dated 08.01.2010 have held as follows: Section 68 read with section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Cash credits - Assessment year 2005-06 - In course of assessment, Assessing Officer asked assessee to prove genuineness of sundry cr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of the Ld. AO and the submissions made by the appellant, and in the light of the judicial pronouncements made by different Hon'ble Courts, in my considered opinion, the Ld AO cannot be faulted for making the additions that she has made, and accordingly confirm the same. As the result, the ground taken by the appellant stands dismissed. 3. We have given our thoughtful consideration to rival contentions. There is hardly any dispute that this assessee is a wholesale dealer / trader in various electrical items and appliances such as water pumps, fans, coolers, gesysers, home appliances etc.,. It transpires during the course of hearing that neither of the lower authorities has rejected assessee s corresponding sales nor have they treated assessee s purchases to be bogus. They simply hold the corresponding parties as bogus sundry creditors. Learned Departmental Representative fails to dispute that if the corresponding sales and purchases are treated as genuine, the very course of action has to be followed regarding creditors parties in issue in order to avoid inconsistency. We therefore reverse the impugned addition in principle on this count alone. 4. Next comes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
