TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1636X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd all the ledger accounts were also filed of M/s. Bartec India Pvt. Ltd., Engineer India Ltd., Mangalore Refinery Petro Chemical Ltd. and M/s. Dcore Exports Ltd. in support of the reconciliation. We note that the only basis on which the AO rejected the reconciliation of the assessee is that the assessee has not properly explained the items of difference and the AO has merely based his conclusion on the basis of audit reports. CIT(A) has recorded a finding that note in the audit report was general in nature and does not bear any relevance to the facts and circumstances of the case. CIT(A) noted that the receipts were offered to tax either in the preceding or subsequent years whereas TDS was claimed in the year of deduction. CIT(A) ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has not maintained consistent policy of accounting ? (2)The appellant prays that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the above ground be set aside and that of the AO be restored. (3) The appellant craves leave to add, delete, alter, amend and modify any or all grounds of appeal. 3. The only issue raised by the Revenue is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) wherein the Ld. CIT(A) has accepted the contentions of the assessee that difference in the receipts shown in the audit report and form No. 26AS were duly reflected in the previous and subsequent assessment years and thus offered to tax. 4. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed return of income on 29.11.2014 declaring the income of Rs. 25,37,770/-. Thereafter the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s calculated by subtracting Rs.4,73,50,036/- from Rs.7,24,00,481/- and added the same to the income of the assessee. 5. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee after considering the contentions and arguments of the assessee by observing and holding as under: 5.2 Ground No. 1 :- This ground relates to the mismatch in receipts as per TDS claimed by the assessee Receipts as per P L account. During course of the assessment proceedings, the AO merely on the basis of the auditor's qualification report in form no. 3CB concluded that the appellant was not following consistence accounting policy and was not able to reconcile the mismatch. However, It was noted that the auditor's qu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the receipts have been offered for tax either in preceding years or in subsequent years. In view of the above I hold that the addition on the basis of mismatch cannot be made merely on the basis of auditor's qualification report, instead of that facts and circumstances of the cases should be looked in to make any addition. In view of the above, it is held that the appellant had offered the receipts for tax either in preceding year or in subsequent year and the same cannot be added in the year under consideration. Hence, the AO is directed to delete the addition of Rs. 2,26,74,445/-and this ground of appeal is allowed. 6. After hearing both the parties and perusing the material on record, we observe that in this case there we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
