9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
The judgment involves the issue of disallowance of a specific amount by the Ld. CIT(A) for the Assessment Year 2000-01, based on the genuineness of transaction, identity, and creditworthiness of the parties involved. Details of the Judgment: Issue 1: Disallowance of Amount The only ground raised by the revenue was the disallowance of a specific amount, and the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance by holding that the assessee had discharged its onus, especially when the genuineness of transaction, identity, and creditworthiness of the parties was not established. Contentions: The learned DR supported the findings in the assessment order, while the counsel for the assessee strongly relied upon the discussions made in the order of CIT(A). The assessee had produced copies of bills and contract notes, all payments were received through account payee cheques/demand drafts, duly credited in the bank account, and recorded in the regular books of account. Judgment: The Tribunal observed that the assessee had provided all details regarding its transactions, including copies of contract notes and bills. The Assessing Officer did not verify these details and did not provide any findings of the investigation to the assessee. The Tribunal held that the addition made by the Assessing Officer lacked evidence put to the assessee during the assessment proceedings. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the Ld. CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition, citing a violation of the principles of natural justice by the Assessing Officer. Conclusion: The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal, upholding the order of the CIT(A) regarding the disallowance issue for the Assessment Year 2000-01. Note: Separate judgments were not delivered by the judges in this case.
|
