2015 (6) TMI 144 - HC - Income Tax

Genuineness of the purchases made - CIT(A) deleted the addition as confirmed by ITAT - Held that - The CIT (A) had in the course of its order not only permitted additional evidence but also called for a remand report. The remand report comprised of various materials including the PAN Number, TIN Number and assessment orders secured from the sales tax authorities. The genuineness of the underlined transactions claimed by the assessee on having purchased goods from its vendors, could not be doubted. An isolated reliance placed upon the ITAT s order to say that the point is left moot is under the circumstances not accurate. - Decided against revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Genuineness of purchases made in the course of business for AY 2007-08.
2. Rejection of explanation regarding purchases from nine named parties.
3. Addition of amount by Assessing Officer in scrutiny assessment.
4. CIT (A)'s findings on purchases and subsequent sales.
5. ITAT's decision on the genuineness of transactions.

Analysis:

1. The Revenue challenged the ITAT's order regarding the genuineness of purchases made by the assessee for AY 2007-08. The Assessing Officer added a significant amount after rejecting the explanation for purchases from nine parties, deeming them as bogus transactions. The CIT (A) allowed the assessee to submit additional records, including evidence from the Sales Tax Department. Despite efforts to trace the parties, they did not comply. The CIT (A) considered various factors, including the parties' tax records and banking details, concluding that holding the purchases as bogus was not justified solely based on parties' non-appearance before tax authorities after a considerable time lapse.

2. The CIT (A) rejected the subsequent sales by the assessee, claiming the items were sold below cost price, resulting in a loss. Both the CIT (A) and the ITAT upheld this decision, leading to a dispute with the Revenue. The Revenue contended that the ITAT erred in not considering the genuineness of directions to the parties and their non-response during assessment proceedings. The ITAT observed that the CIT (A) did not conclusively decide the issue, as per the impugned order's paragraph 8.1.

3. The Court examined the submissions and noted that the CIT (A) allowed additional evidence and obtained a detailed remand report, which included crucial details like PAN and TIN numbers from sales tax authorities. The Court emphasized that the genuineness of the transactions could not be questioned based solely on the ITAT's observation that the issue was left undecided. As the Revenue failed to demonstrate any factual perversity, the Court found no legal question for consideration and dismissed the appeal.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues surrounding the genuineness of purchases, rejection of explanations, addition of amounts, findings on purchases and subsequent sales, and the ITAT's decision, providing a comprehensive overview of the legal proceedings and outcomes.