TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 2065X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt case. Respectfully following the same, we delete the disallowance made by the AO. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 447/MUM/2018 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) - - - Dated:- 16-5-2018 - SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessee by: Mr. Kirit Sanghvi, AR Revenue by: Mr. Sourabh Deshpande, DR ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant assessment year is 2012-13. The appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-25, Mumbai [in short CIT(A) ] and arises out of the assessment completed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961, (the Act ). 2. The grounds of appeal filed by the assessee read ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ashadevi Dudi ₹ 4,77,680/- (iii) Sachin R. Rane ₹ 3,91,952/- (iv) Sushiladevi Dudi ₹ 4,72,340/- Total ₹ 20,74,957/- The AO vide letter dated 04.02.2015 asked the assessee to produce the details or purchases from these parties along with bills and vouchers and payment details. However, the assessee filed the bills in its own letter pad mentioning the name of the above parties and the quantity and amount paid to them. The AO being not convinced with the said details filed by the assessee, sent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tered with the VAT department and known as Un-registered Dealer i.e. URD. The payments to both the classes of vendors are made through account payee cheque only. The Ld. counsel submits that the AO claims to have issued summons u/s 133(6) to the parties, but the exact parties to whom the summons were served are not known. It is stated that the AO claims to have asked the assessee to produce the parties which the appellant denies. It is finally stated that the appellant had furnished to the AO the name, address and PAN of the parties from whom the material was acquired. Further, the appellant also produced quantitative records showing quantitative tally of the materials, which fact is admitted by the AO. It is stated that if the AO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f account of the respondent-assessee have not been rejected. In view of the above, by order dated 30.04.2010 the Tribunal deleted the disallowance of ₹ 1.33 crores by holding that the purchases were not bogus. In further appeal the Hon ble Bombay High Court agreed with the reasons given by the Tribunal and dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. In the instant case, the assessee has filed before the AO the ledger confirmations of purchases from parties who supplied more than ₹ 10,00,000/- during the year under consideration. The AO has received it on 19.02.2015. Those confirmations are at page 8-17 of the P/B. The ledger account with purchase bills of all unregistered vendors are at page 18-118 of the P/B. The proof of pay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
