9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 1144X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t as non-genuine purchase is the result of non-appreciation of facts and law & ignoring evidence produced on wholly wrong premises, which is wholly unjustified, illegal and vitiated and should be fully deleted in the facts and circumstances of the case. Ground No.1 : 2. Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that the CIT(A) is wholly unjustified and unreasonable to confirm the addition of Rs. 2,25,254/- being the provident fund amount paid via Tata Refractories Ltd.(in short 'TRL') as per arrangement between the assessee, a contractor under the principal TRL. Ld. Counsel further submitted that the ld. first appellate authority failed to appreciate this simple business practice and ignoring all the evidences produced before him and he, thus, was not justified in confirming the addition, which is totally illegal, unjustified and bad in law. Ld. Counsel of the assessee vehemently pointed out that the entire addition should be deleted being unsustainable and illegal. 3. Replying to the above, ld. Departmental Representative (DR) strongly supported the assessment as well as the first appellate order and submitted that before the authorities below the assessee explained that he is a d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd for F.Y.2009-2010 has been submitted to the finance department of TRL for necessary action and payment of provident fund by the contractee, as agreed by both the parties. In view of the above, I am of the considered opinion that the assessee has submitted plausible evidence in his command to show that the as agreed by the assessee-contractor and TRL-contractee, the amount of provident fund to be deducted was calculated and statement was submitted by the assessee to the financial department of TRL, obviously with an object to comply with the provident fund proceedings. Further there is no evidence either before authorities below or before the Tribunal to show that as per the instruction of the assessee, the TRL deducted the provident fund from the billing amount of the assessee for further depositing the same to the provident fund department/competent authority. Therefore, keeping in view the request of both the sides, I restore the issue to the file of AO for limited verification as to whether the TRL has deducted the provident fund from the bill raised by the assessee for further depositing the same to the provident fund authority/competent authority. Accordingly, ground No.1 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 03.2013 and in support of the same, the assessee also submitted purchase register along with all purchase bills for verification with a submission that the figure submitted with sales tax department may be different which will be verified at the time of audit by the sale tax department and the sales tax department verified the same and found correct at the time of issuing the certificate on 29.05.2015, therefore, the authorities below were not correct in making the addition in this regard. Accordingly, ld. AR submitted that the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) being unjustified, incorrect and unsustainable, may kindly be deleted. 8. Replying to the above, ld. DR submitted that during the assessment proceedings, the assessee in his submission dated 20.03.2013 admitted that the original VAT return filed before the Sales Tax Department has some mistake and to patch up the inflation of purchase he filed revised return of VAT is purely after thought, which cannot be taken into cognizance. Therefore, the AO was right in making addition. 9. Placing rejoinder to the above, ld. counsel of the assessee submitted that the assessee vide his reply dated 08.03.2013 submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore the AO for verification. The assessee also explained that the figure submitted with Sales Tax Department may be different which will be verified by the audit by the Sales Tax Department and keeping in view the certificate issued by the Deputy Commissioner on 29.05.2015, I am inclined to hold that when the figures shown by the assessee in the trading account are matching with the certificate issued by the Sales Tax Department, then no addition is called for on the basis of earlier tentative and provision figures shown by the assessee as per the Sales Tax Department in absence of any verification or audit by the Sales Tax Department. The assessee by way of certificate and relevant documents such as profit and loss account, purchase register and relevant purchase bills has discharged onus lay on his shoulder establishing that the total amount of purchase during F.Y.2009-2010 relevant to A.Y.2010-2011 was Rs. 1,40,22,079/-, which is similar to the amount shown by the assessee in the profit and loss account as on 31.03.2010, therefore, no addition is called for in this regard. For verifying total actual amount of sales it is necessary to obtain the details from the Sales Tax Departm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
