TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 759X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... below ₹ 5 lakhs. According to the CIT(A), these credits are genuine and outstanding on account of purchases - these purchases ought to have been verified individually so as to satisfy the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions which the CIT(Appeals) failed to do so. In view of this, we remit this issue to the file of the AO for fresh consideration - Revenue s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes. - ITA No.2290/Bang/2019 CO No.2/Bang/2021 [in ITA No.2290/Bang/2019] - - - Dated:- 29-11-2021 - SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Revenue by : Smt. Priyadarshini Besaganni, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Assessee by : Shri S.R. Kiron, CA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing, section 68 is not at all applicable and hence the entire addition of ₹ 3,71,29,290 by the Learned Assessing Officer deserves to be deleted. 4. It could be noted at page 4 of 16 of the Learned CIT(A) Order dated 29.08.2019, the Appellant at Ground 5 before the CIT(A) had contested that section 68 has no application in it's case. This ground has not been adjourned by the Learned CIT(A). Hence, the order deserves to be set aside to the Learned CIT(A) for this limited issue. 5. For the above and other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing of the Cross-Objection, your Respondent/Cross-Objector humbly prays that the appeal filed by/ the appellant. A.O. in the respect of the relief granted by the CIT(Appeals) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... creditors. The AO concluded that 07 creditors amounting to ₹ 3,71,29,294, where the confirmations nor information were submitted by the assessee, were bogus and brought it to tax u/s. 68 of the Act. 6. The CIT(Appeals) called for a remand report from the AO and the assessee also filed a rejoinder to the same. The AO had made an addition of ₹ 3,71,29,294 u/s. 68 of the Act as under:- Sl. No. Name of the Party Amount added (in Rs) 1 Abhishek Alloys Pvt Ltd 23,49,927 2 Accurate Gauging Instruments Pvt Ltd 10,84,110 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in his order. Hence the same is confirmed. 9. As regards the addition of credits in the name of Mrs Nirmala of ₹ 8,04,000 and Mrs Vilva Lakshmi of ₹ 8,23,582, it was submitted by the assessee that these two creditors are family members of the partners and not sundry creditors. The confirmations could not be filed before the AO as they were not in station during the relevant time. The assessee filed the confirmations before the CIT(Appeals), which were sent to the AO for verification and report. The AO in his report has mentioned that since these confirmations were not submitted during the scrutiny proceedings, same should not be considered at the appeal stage for credibility reason. 10. The CIT(Appeals) observed that the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted by the CIT(Appeals) on the reason that there was valid confirmation letter filed by the assessee before the CIT(Appeals) and on the basis of remand report from the AO called for, the CIT(Appeals) sustained only ₹ 16,42,075 out of the addition of ₹ 1,11,57,112 made by the AO. In our opinion, there is a valid confirmation letter and the outstanding is on account of purchases from that company and the AO cannot doubt the genuineness of the transaction and capacity of the lender. Being so, the CIT(Appeals) has taken a correct view of facts of the case and accordingly this ground of the revenue is dismissed. 13. With regard to the addition of ₹ 2,13,57,434 on account of purchase payable, the CIT(Appeals) observed that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
