TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 552X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f that case, it was noted that the said presumption was established considering the finding of fact returned by the first appellate authority as affirmed by the Tribunal which is identical in the present case. We also note that the said decision of this Court has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Reliance Industries Limited [ 2019 (1) TMI 757 - SUPREME COURT] . We do not find any good ground to entertain this question for consideration. Loss arising on account of valuation of outstanding liabilities / receivables - HELD THAT:- Tribunal followed the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd. [ 2009 (4) TMI 4 - SUPREME COURT] declaring that it is now settled proposition of law that the loss arising ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing officer ought not to have made the additions without carrying out independent enquiry and without affording due opportunity to the respondent - assessee to controvert the statements made by the sellers before the other authority. Accordingly, we do not find any good ground to entertain this question for consideration as well. - UJJAL BHUYAN, MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. Mr. A. R. Malhotra for Appellant. Mr. Porus F. Kaka, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Divesh Chawla i/b. Mr. Atul K. Jasani for Respondent. P.C. : Heard Mr. Malhotra, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Kaka, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Chawla and Mr. Jasani, learned counsel for the respondent - assessee. 2. This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue under Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mann 128 (2013), M/s. Viraj Profiles Limited in ITA No.4439/Mum/2013 dated 21.10.2015 - 46 ITR (T) 626 and in Ferani Hotels Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.857/Mum/2013 dated 17/11/2014? 4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of ₹ 3,32,867.00 relating to bogus purchases without appreciating the fact that the addition was made on the basis of statement given before the Sale Tax Department by the proprietors of M/s. Nutan Metal and M/s. Kant Enterprises who have submitted that they have neither purchased nor sold goods and have issued fake bills for the amount received by cheque and have returned these amounts in cash? 4. In respect of question No.1 initial submis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... does not dispute the said finding and relying on the decision of this Court in CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Limited, 313 ITR 340, affirmed the deletion made by the first appellate authority. 7. We have perused the decision of this Court in Reliance Utilities and Power Limited (supra) wherein it has been held that if there are funds available with the assessee, both, interest-free and overdraft and / or loans taken then a presumption would arise that investments would be out of the interest-free funds generated or available with the assessee if the interest-free funds were sufficient to meet the investments. In the facts of that case, it was noted that the said presumption was established considering the finding of fact returned by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2 ITR 254 declaring that it is now settled proposition of law that the loss arising on account of valuation of outstanding liabilities / receivables cannot be considered as a notional loss. Therefore, Tribunal held that the first appellate authority had rightly set aside the addition made by the assessing officer. 11. Regarding adjustments made in the book profit under Section 115JB of the Act following disallowance made under Section 14A of the Act on account of foreign exchange fluctuations, Tribunal held that since it had upheld the order of the first appellate authority deleting the additions made under Section 14A of the Act, the contention of the Revenue needed to be turned down. 12. In the present decision, we have also affirmed the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is assessment order dated 31.01.2013 held that there was no actual purchase of goods by the respondent - assessee and accordingly the aforesaid two amounts totalling ₹ 3,32,867.00 was disallowed and consequently added to the total income of the respondent - assessee. 16. Though the first appellate authority did not interfere with the order passed by the assessing officer, contention of the respondent - assessee that copy of the statement made by M/s. Kant Enterprises before the Sales Tax Department, Government of Maharashtra was not made available to the respondent - assessee though copy of statement made by M/s. Nutan Metals was made available, was recorded. 17. On further appeal before the Tribunal by the respondent - assessee, Trib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
