|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 161 to 180 of 324 Records
-
2025 (3) TMI 164
Challenge to assessment issued u/s 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - petitioner, a statutory body under the Kerala Khadi & Village Industries Board Act, claimed exemption from GST based on previous exemptions from VAT and service tax - HELD THAT:- It is opined that notwithstanding the nature of services being carried out by the petitioner, the GST Act does not provide any exemption nor a “zero rated tax” for the products of the petitioner. In such circumstances, the claim for exemption based on the earlier statutes cannot have any legal basis. Further, there cannot be any estoppel against a statute. Since concededly, the taxing provisions of the GST Act is applicable to the petitioner, the contentions based on the earlier statutes have no bearing.
Since Ext.P5 assessment order can be appealed before the Appellate Authority as provided under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, this Court is of the view that the petitioner ought to be relegated to pursue such remedies.
Conclusion - Reserving the liberty of the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedies against Ext.P5, this writ petition is dismissed.
-
2025 (3) TMI 163
TaxmannViolation of principles of natural justice - petitioners could not file reply to the notice, issued by the respondent-Authority as the same was not reflected on the GST Portal in the Notice section but it was uploaded under the Additional Notices/Orders tab on the Portal - attachment of bank account of the petitioners - HELD THAT:- Issue Notice for final disposal, returnable on 16th January, 2025.
-
2025 (3) TMI 162
Rectification of mistake apparent on the face of record - whether the services provided to Government entities are exempted services under the GST Act? - HELD THAT:- In terms of section 102 of the GST Act, the Authority or the Appellate Authority or the National Appellate Authority may amend any order passed by it under section 98 or section 101 or section 101C respectively, so as to rectify any error apparent on the face of the record, if such error is noticed by the Authority or the Appellate Authority or the National Appellate Authority on its own accord, or is brought to its notice by the concerned officer, the jurisdictional officer, the applicant appellant, the Authority or the Appellate Authority within a period of six months from the date of the order.
Any mistake which is manifest, plain, or obvious may be regarded as a mistake apparent on the face of the record and thereby may be rectified invoking the provision of section 102. A rectification is done when there is an error which is apparent on the face of record in such decision or order or notice or certificate or any other document. Thus, errors which involves question of law cannot be rectified.
The application for rectification of the order filed by the applicant cannot be accepted - application rejected.
-
2025 (3) TMI 161
Levy of GST on reimbursement of municipal property tax by the lessee/occupier - HELD THAT:- In terms of sub-section (1) of section 9 of the GST Act, tax in levied inter alia on the value determined under section 15 of the said Act. It has already been submitted by the applicant himself that section 15 of the GST Act deals with value of taxable supply - In this case, the municipal property tax levied under the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980, being a tax other than the CGST Act/ WBGST Act/ UTGST Act/ GST (Compensation to States) Act shall therefore form a part of the value of supply on which GST will be levied.
In the instant case, value of supply would be inclusive of municipal property tax and tax under the GST Act is payable on such value.
-
2025 (3) TMI 160
Levy of GST - reimbursement of electricity charges on actual basis - HELD THAT:- As per para (a) of explanation of rule 33, “pure agent” is a person who “enters into a contractual agreement with the recipient of supply to act as his pure agent to incur expenditure or costs in the course of supply of goods or services or both” - In Circular No. 206/18/2023-GST dated 31st October, 2023 , it has been clarified that where the Real Estate Owners, Resident Welfare Associations (RWAs), Real Estate Developers etc., charge for electricity on actual basis that is, they charge the same amount for electricity from their lessees or occupants as charged by the State Electricity Boards or DISCOMs from them, they will be deemed to be acting as pure agent for this supply.
In the instant case, the applicant has enclosed copy of electricity bill along with invoice issued by the applicant to its sub-lessee towards ‘Reimbursement of power charges’ wherefrom it appears that applicant collects the actual cost of electricity consumed by the sub-lessee - The fact of the case involved in the instant case is identical to the clarification given in the Circular No. 206/18/2023-GST dated 31st October, 2023.
The applicant here will be deemed to be acting as pure agent in regard to supply of electricity to its sub-lessee and the reimbursement amount shall not be a part of his value of supply.
Conclusion - The applicant is not liable to pay GST on reimbursement of electricity charges on actual basis.
-
2025 (3) TMI 159
Scope of Advance Ruling application - whether the supply of processed sea food (frozen) like prawn and fish to industrial or institutional customers in ‘industrial pack-not for retail sale’ is taxable or exempted? - HELD THAT:- The question on which advance ruling is sought by the applicant is found to be covered under clause (e) of sub-section (2) of section 97 of the GST Act.
The applicant has been provided sufficient opportunities of being heard. The officer concerned from the revenue, relying on the FAQ issued vide F. No. 190354/172/2022 TRU dated 17.07.2022, has opined that the goods in question is exempted subject to fulfilment of certain conditions. Otherwise it would attract tax @ 5%. However, in absence of any submission supported by documentary evidences on behalf of the applicant, it is unable to decide whether the applicant supplies the goods in such manner as to attract exclusion provided under the said rule 3(c) of the Legal Metrological (Package Commodities) Rules, 2011.
-
2025 (3) TMI 158
Value of supply of services provided by the applicant company to the State Government - rate of tax applicable on the value of supply - inclusion of components in calculation of the % of value of goods in the total value of composite supply for the purpose of Notification No. 2/2018-Central Tax (Rate).
HELD THAT:- The applicant has been selected for empanelment for crushing of wheat into wholemeal atta and fortify it by premixing of micro-nutrients containing Iron, Folic acid, Citrate, EDTA and Vitamins to a specific percentage. The agreement further requires the applicant to pack the crushed stock of wholemeal atta after fortification into properly labelled poly-packs having thickness of 50 microns or above. It, therefore, appears that the activities undertaken by them for milling of wheat into wheat flour, along with fortification and supplied upon packing of the same qualify the definition of ‘composite supply’ under clause (30) of section 2 of the GST Act where the supply of services by way of milling is the principal supply.
Whether this composite supply is made in relation to any function entrusted to a Panchayat under article 243G of the Constitution or in relation to any function entrusted to a Municipality under article 243W of the Constitution? - HELD THAT:- Reference made to Para 3.1 of the Circular No. 153/09/2021-GST dated 17.06.2021 where it is stated that ‘Public Distribution specifically figures at entry 28 of the 11th Schedule to the constitution, which lists the activities that may be entrusted to a Panchayat under Article 243G of the Constitution.’ Hence, the instant composite supply made by the applicant is found to be in relation to any function entrusted to a Panchayat under article 243G of the Constitution.
Whether the value of supply of goods in this case exceeds 25 percent of the total value of the supply or not? - HELD THAT:- The contention of the applicant that the provisions of Rule 27(b) will be applicable for the instant case for the purpose of determination of value of supply has duly been considered. Rule 27 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 and West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (collectively referred to as, the GST Rules) prescribes the manner of determination of value of supply where the consideration is not wholly in money. In terms of clause (b) of the said rule, the value of supply shall be the sum total of consideration in money and any such further amount in money as is equivalent to the consideration not in money, if such amount is known at the time of supply - the total value of supply to be Rs.260.48 out of which Rs.136.48 is the cash consideration and Rs.124.00 is the non-cash consideration, as it has been explained in the aforesaid memo. The value of goods involved in the instant supply stands at = Fortification Cost: Rs. 10.00 + Packing Charges: Rs. 50.00 = Rs.60.00 against total value of supply of Rs. 260.48, thereby the value of goods involved in the instant composite supply stands at = 60/260.48 x 100 = 23.03% of the total value of supply i.e., it does not exceed 25% of the value of the composite supply.
The supply of services provided by the applicant company to the State Government is by nature a composite supply of services by way of milling of food grains into flour (atta) to the Government i.e. Food & Supplies Department, Govt. of West Bengal for distribution of such flour under Public Distribution System (PDS) which is by way of an activity in relation to a function entrusted to a Panchayat under article 243G covered by entry in sl. no. 28 of the Eleventh Schedule appended to article 243G of the Constitution of India and where, as already discussed, the value of goods involved in the instant composite supply does not exceed 25% of the value of the composite supply.
The instant supply of services by way of milling of food grains into flour (atta) to Food & Supplies Department, Govt. of West Bengal for distribution of such flour under Public Distribution System is eligible for exemption under serial no. 3A of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, as amended, since the supply satisfies all the conditions specified in the said entry.
Conclusion - i) The value of supply involved in this case relating to supply of services provided by the applicant company to the State Government is Rs. 260.48 which comprises of the consideration in money as well as non-cash consideration. ii) The supply of services provided by the applicant company to the State Government is by nature a composite supply of services by way of milling of food grains into flour (atta) to Food & Supplies Department, Govt. of West Bengal for distribution of such flour under Public Distribution System and such is eligible for exemption under entry serial no. 3A of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, as amended, since the value of goods involved in such composite supply does not exceed 25% of the value of supply.
-
2025 (3) TMI 157
Eligibility for exemption benefit under N/N. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 18.06.2017 (Sl. No. 3 or 5/6 or 46, as the case may be), as amended - applicant’s supply of MVU personnel on contractual basis for implementation of “Establishment and Strengthening of Veterinary Hospitals & Dispensaries (ESVHD) - Mobile Veterinary Unit (MVU) under Livestock Health & Disease Control (LH & DC) Scheme - HELD THAT:- The Livestock Healthcare & Disease Control Scheme is a flagship program of the Government of India, where the concerned State Government has been entrusted with the responsibility of developing further guidelines, including delineating roles and responsibilities of all functionaries at different levels. The West Bengal Livestock Development Corporation Limited, under the administrative control of the Department of Animal Resources Development, Govt. of West Bengal, is the project implementing agency for such Livestock Healthcare & Disease Control Scheme and is one of the designated Service Providers for operating MVUs in the allotted districts of West Bengal.
West Bengal Livestock Development Corporation Limited directed the applicant to supply MVU personnel purely on contractual basis, maintaining the guidelines of the tender applicable in this case as well as MVU guidelines issued by the competent authority from time to time. The applicant is required to, inter alia, supply labour/manpower for running the production at different units of the West Bengal Livestock Development Corporation Limited. The applicant has, accordingly, been supplying MVU personnel and raising tax invoices from time to time - Admittedly the applicant makes supply of labour/manpower for running the production at different units of the West Bengal Livestock Development Corporation Limited.
In the instant case, the West Bengal Livestock Development Corporation Limited has entered into an agreement with the applicant for supply of MUV personnel on contractual basis for which the applicant issues invoices to the aforesaid implementing agency. Admittedly, the West Bengal Livestock Development Corporation Limited is liable to pay the consideration to the applicant for the supply. The applicant has furnished a copy of tax invoice which has been raised to the Managing Director, West Bengal Livestock Development Corporation Limited holding GSTIN 19AABCT0907D1ZP. Thus, West Bengal Livestock Development Corporation Limited undisputedly is the recipient of supply provided by the applicant meaning thereby the applicant doesn’t make any supply to the Department concerned.
Whether the applicant who is merely supplying MVU personnel on contractual basis for implementation of “Establishment and Strengthening of Veterinary Hospitals & Dispensaries (ESVHD) - Mobile Veterinary Unit (MVU) can be regarded as a veterinary clinic? - HELD THAT:- In the instant case, two separate supplies take place. The first one is made by the applicant to West Bengal Livestock Development Corporation Limited and thereafter another supply is made by West Bengal Livestock Development Corporation Limited to the Department concerned, i.e. the Department of Animal Resources Development, Govt. of West Bengal. The expression ‘veterinary clinic’ has not been defined in the GST Act. However, in common parlance, a veterinary clinic means a building or part of a building where animals are provided with treatment or medication including diagnosis, surgery, general health care and observation. Here the applicant is merely a supplier of manpower services on contractual basis for running a Mobile Veterinary Unit. Thus, such supply of manpower made by the applicant cannot be held as a supply of services by a veterinary clinic in relation to health care of animals or birds and hence such supply fails to qualify for exemption benefit under Sl. No. 46 of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 18.06.2017 as amended.
Conclusion - The applicant’s supply of MVU personnel on contractual basis for implementation of “Establishment and Strengthening of Veterinary Hospitals & Dispensaries (ESVHD) - Mobile Veterinary Unit (MVU) under Livestock Health & Disease Control (LH & DC) Scheme” is not eligible for exemption benefit under Sl. No. 3 or 3A or 5 or 6 or 46 of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 18.06.2017, as amended till date.
-
2025 (3) TMI 156
Expenses incurred are excessive u/s 40A(2)(b) - Applicability of provisions of section 44BBB - HC [2024 (2) TMI 1531 - DELHI HIGH COURT] held that material particulars had been duly placed before the DRP and the AO failed to justify the invocation of the said provision. ITAT has further found that the Department had failed to produce any material or establish from the record that the expenses claimed were inflated or unjustified. Also assessee was not executing a turnkey power project to attract applicability of provisions of section 44BBB
HELD THAT:- We do not find any good ground and reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and, hence, the present special leave petition is dismissed.
-
2025 (3) TMI 155
Proceedings u/s 153C - issuance of the notice was preceded by the drawl of a Satisfaction Note by the jurisdictional AO - importance of material recovered in the course of a search or a requisition made and a right to reassess u/s 153A and 153C - scope of Incriminating material.
As decided by HC [2024 (4) TMI 461 - DELHI HIGH COURT] abatement of the six AYs’ or the “relevant assessment year” would follow the formation of that opinion and satisfaction in that respect being reached - Jurisdictional AO would have to firstly be satisfied that the material received is likely to have a bearing on or impact the total income of years or years which may form part of the block of six or ten AYs’ and thereafter proceed to place the assessee on notice u/s 153C. The power to undertake such an assessment would stand confined to those years to which the material may relate or is likely to influence. Absent any material that may either cast a doubt on the estimation of total income for a particular year or years, the AO would not be justified in invoking its powers conferred by Section 153C.
HELD THAT:- There is a delay of 185, 155, 97, 190, 186 and 171 days in filing the Special Leave Petitions respectively which have not been satisfactorily explained. Even otherwise, we have gone through the Special Leave Petition and do not find any merit in the same.
Special Leave Petitions are therefore, dismissed on the ground of delay as well as on merits.
-
2025 (3) TMI 154
Benefit of exemption u/s 11 & 12 - Section 13(1)(b) applicability - delay of 306 days in preferring this petition before SC - HELD THAT:- The High Court seems to have taken the view that the assessee is a religious society working for the benefit of a particular community and therefore is entitled to the benefit of exemption under Sections 11 & 12 of the Act, 1961 respectively. However, prima facie it appears that the High Court overlooked the fact that the society has been registered under Section 12A of the Act, 1961 as a charitable institution/organisation.
Issue notice on the application for delay as well as on the main matter.
-
2025 (3) TMI 153
Bogus Long Term Capital Gain - sale of shares of Global Capital Markets Ltd., a penny stock - period of holding of shares - AO that the price movement of the company were not supporting by financial fundamentals of the company - ITAT deleted addition - HC [2023 (12) TMI 1422 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] held Assessee has sold shares after seven years and therefore, the proximity of time between the buy and sale of shares cannot be considered as an accommodation entry in penny stock company within a short period of about one year to book bogus of Long Terms Capital Gain or loss to defraud the Revenue.
AO and CIT(A) have ignored such facts which were considered by the Tribunal to arrive at a finding of fact that the assessee has to be treated as an investor and cannot be treated to have engaged in fraudulent activity or manipulation activity.
HELD THAT:- No reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court.
The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
-
2025 (3) TMI 152
Entitlement to interest for delayed payment of refund under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 - HELD THAT:- It is true that the petitioner is not entitled to interest under Section 244A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, however, when the petitioner has opted for direct tax for Vivad se Visvas Scheme 2020 and filed the application which was approved by the designated authority and refund order is also passed as per the said scheme on 12/05/2022 by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, the petitioner was entitled to the interest on the amount of refund till the same was paid to the petitioner. The respondents are therefore liable to pay the interest on the amount of refund.
Without considering whether it is a fault on part of the petitioner to validate the bank account or whether any negligence on part of the respondents for not releasing the amount of refund, we direct the respondents to pay the amount of interest at the rate of 6% per annum as per the calculation provided to us amounting to Rs.22,04,104/- for twenty months from 01/06/2022 to 31/01/2024 considering the entire month on amount of Rs. 2,20,41,042/- within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
-
2025 (3) TMI 151
Tribunal disposing of the Appeal by observing the fact that the petitioner did not disclose truly and fully all the particulars necessary for the assessment - reopening of the assessment on the ground that no unabsorbed investment allowance was available for Assessment Year
HELD THAT:- Tribunal has erroneously observed “the fact as to whether the depreciation has been claimed on the machinery installed for trial production has not been shown in the computation statement”.
It appears that the Tribunal has lost sight of the fact that in the computation statement, there is no requirement of showing that the depreciation has been claimed on machinery installed for trial production.
On perusal of the Assessment Orders passed u/s 143 (3) of the Act dated 30th March, 1994 as well as the Reassessment Order dated 29.10.1999, it appears that the Assessing Officer has considered the issue of depreciation in detail on the basis of the information provided by the petitioner as well as considering the fact that the petitioner has disclosed truly and fully all the facts necessary for the assessment.
The findings of the Tribunal while rejecting the Misc. Application of the petitioner appear to be perverse. Tribunal has failed to consider that there is no failure on the part of the assessee about disclosing truly and fully all material facts necessary for the assessment and therefore, the view taken by the Tribunal is erroneous on face of the record.
Tribunal order is hereby quashed and set aside and the Misc. Application filed by the petitioner is allowed and the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal to pass a fresh de-novo order.
-
2025 (3) TMI 150
Validity of order u/s 144C(1) - errors in the implementation of the Faceless Assessment Scheme - notices sent prior to framing assessment - Order did not meet the requirements of a DAO as it lacked the necessary stipulations for the assessee to respond - HELD THAT:- The officer has made reference to the statutory requirement under Section 144C(2) of the Act, which requires an assessee on receipt of a DAO, to either indicate acceptance or file objections to the DAO proposals with the DRP within 30 days. The officer then blames the assessee for neither filing its acceptance nor objections with the DRP within the time provided.
The fact of the matter was that such statutory option was never extended to the assessee. Hence, the assessee could not have complied with the statutory requirement as order of assessment dated 27.12.2010 does not extend such option as it ought to have. The corrigendum stating that order dated 27.12.2010 may be taken to be a DAO has itself been issued only on 21.02.2011, two months after order dated 27.12.2010. Hence, the period of 30 days provided in terms of Section 144C(2) has expired by then and the attempt of the Department to circumvent the issue and pin the blame for its error on the assessee is nothing short of a travesty of its statutory responsibilities under that provision.
Importantly, a demand accompanying an assessment order is a statutory demand in terms of Section 156 of the Act, which states that 'when any tax, interest, penalty, fine or any other sum is payable in consequence of any order passed under this Act, the assessing officer shall serve upon the assessee a notice of demand in the prescribed form specifying the sum so payable'. The recovery of the demand under that notice is as per the modes of recovery under Section 226 of the Act.
There is hence, a sanctity attached to a demand under a notice under Section 156 of the Act that cannot be wished away merely by issuing a letter styled as a 'corrigendum'. If at all such demand is to be extinguished, the order under which such demand was raised ought to be reversed in a manner known to law.
Notices sent prior to framing assessment dated 27.12.2010, do not adhere to the statutory stipulations of Section 144C of the Act and such aberrations in law are not saved by virtue of Section 292BB.
Court has held that all irregular, erroneous or illegal orders cannot be held to be non est as there is a distinction between orders that are null and void on the one hand, and those that are irregular, wrong or illegal, on the other. We are of the view that the above judgement, rather than advancing the case of the Revenue, would support the case of the assessee.
We disagree with the Tribunal in its conclusion that the errors committed by the Department in this matter are insignificant and have assigned reasons in the paragraphs supra in support of our conclusion that the errors committed are fundamental to the assumption of jurisdiction and go to the root of the matter.
In light of the fact that we have upheld the validity of order as a regular assessment, we answer substantial questions 1 to 3 in favour of the assessee and adverse to the revenue.
-
2025 (3) TMI 149
Validity of ex-parte assessment order and subsequent demand notices issued - assessment order was passed on the basis of aforesaid FIR lodged by daughter of petitioner No.1 - HELD THAT:- The foundation of impugned assessment orders is FIR No.3 dated 01.01.2001 which stands quashed by this Court on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. The respondent-department concededly has neither conducted independent investigation nor brought on record evidence to the effect that petitioner actually earned aforesaid amount during the relevant assessment year. In the absence of any concrete evidence, demand cannot be created on assumptions and presumptions.
Thus, we are of the considered opinion that present petition deserves to be allowed and accordingly allowed.
-
2025 (3) TMI 148
Unexplained investments u/s 69 - Estimation of income at the rate of 8% on total deposit in bank account and cash deposit in the bank accounts of the assessee - HELD THAT:- We find that the assessee is running a cold storage and receiving rentals for renting out the space.
During the year, the assessee’s total receipt was ₹ 1,80,64,642/- and total expenses was ₹ 1,80,52,273/- and thus, the net profit was only ₹ 12,368/-. We note that the assessee has incurred huge expenses on the electricity and various other expenses which aggregated to ₹ 1,80,52,273/-. We have also observed from the perusal of the bank statements of the two banks that assessee at no point of time has any substantial money accumulating in these bank accounts.
Therefore, the theory invoked by the ld. AO that assessee has unexplained investments u/s 69 of the Act is wrong and against the facts on record. It is only for this reason the addition made by the ld. AO u/s 69 of the Act is ordered to be deleted by setting aside the order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals).
Second addition on estimation - We note that the ld. AO has applied 8% on other deposits in the bank accounts/ aggregate to ₹ 71,62,220/-. We observe from the profit and loss account, that the assessee has a very meagre profit of ₹ 12,368/- and therefore, such estimation which is devoid of any basis cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the addition made by the ld. AO is ordered to be deleted by setting aside the order of ld. CIT (A) and the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
-
2025 (3) TMI 147
Correct amount of the interest u/s 234A - HELD THAT:- As per clause (a) of sub-section 1 to section 234A, interest is to be charged for every month or part of a month comprised in the period commencing on the date immediately following the due date till the ending on the date of furnishing of the return.
Due date for filing of return of income in the case of assessee was 30th September 2011.
Undisputedly assessee had filed the return of income for the first time in response to notice u/s 148 on 10.5.2018 and no return was filed u/s 139 thus assessee is liable for interest u/s 234A as provided in section 234A(1)(a) of the Act.
Since the AO vide rectification order has corrected the period of default in filing the return by the assessee from one month to eighty months which is in accordance with the provisions of section 234(1)(a) thus, there is no error in such order. Decided against assessee.
-
2025 (3) TMI 146
Bogus Purchases - AO has primarily doubted the purchases only on basis of transportation of the goods being suspicious - HELD THAT:-Quite apparently the assessee has provided all the relevant and necessary evidences to the ld. AO to establish genuineness of the purchases. However, with out commenting anything on same and unable to point any deficiency in these documentary evidences the AO has relied oral statements. Further these observation of AO are based upon the statements recorded by AO behind the back of assessee and were not confronted to assessee during the course of assessment proceedings and thus, any observations based on such statements could have been relied upon.
CIT(A) has highlighted the observation of Ld. AO in his remand report that Sh. Mohan Lal Gupta in his statement has mentioned certain facts which are contradictory. Thus Ld. CIT(A) has casted a doubt over reliability and credibility of the statement of Sh. Mohan Lal Gupta and concluded that appellant has indeed undertaken some manipulation in terms of prices. However, this observation of Ld. CIT(A) is without establishing as to what was transaction under taken with Sh. Mohan Lal Gupta in the impugned year. We find that with very general observations the ld. Tax authorities have proceeded to doubt the purchases.
As far doubting the use of transport vehicle is concerned, it is not the case of ld. AO that the assessee was making payments to the transporters. Then the owners of the transport agencies duly appeared before Ld. AO and their statement was record which are on record wherein they have confirmed the fact that goods were transported by them to the assessee company and the payments for the same were made by the suppliers.
Thus for any discrepancy if any left in details of vehicles used cannot be basis to doubt the wholesome evidences of bills etc filed by the assessee. Thus, in view of the above we are of the considered view that the addition made by AO and sustained by Ld. CIT(A) is without any basis.
Addition on account of alleged suppressed profit embedded in purchases from bogus entity - When the genuineness of the purchases have also been accepted here above by us therefore addition of profit embedded in such purchases cannot be sustained.
Addition on the basis of seized tally data alleging the same to be data of sale made by assessee outside the books - The said document which shows that this document does not even bears the name of the appellant. Moreover, perusal of this document would show that the nomenclature of this documents is “Sales Register” whereas documents is named as “Hygienic Purchase A/c”. This ambiguity establishes that this document neither pertains to assessee nor shows any out of book sales of assessee. Thus no addition could have been made on the basis of document not found from control and possession of assessee.
Addition on the ground that stock found during the survey - We find that the copy of profit and loss a/c of assessee for the period 01.04.2013 to 31.01.2014 which shows that assessee has shown closing stock in the books as on 31.01.2014 at Rs. 4,15,79,778/- and thus the comparison drawn by Ld. AO on 28.02.2014 could not be taken into consideration. Even otherwise without any basis, evidence or material the valuation was arrived and same deserves to be deleted.
Unexplained sales - documents found and seized by search party RU-1 and marked as annexure A-39 shows the sales made by assessee of Rs. 24,26,94,374/- however, assessee failed to reconcile the same to the tune of Rs. 19,83,94,520/- - letter filed by Mr. Sanjeev Kumar before Ld. ADIT(inv.) making surrender in his hand and further submitting the working which is enclosed at PB 292-295 and same shows that assessee has surrendered 3% profit i.e. Rs. 78,99,000/- on total un-reconciled turnover of Rs. 26,33,00,000/- (PB 295) which includes un-reconciled turnover of Rs. 10,28,69,230 in the case of assessee in AY 2014-15 based on the said seized document in his personal capacity. PB 288A-290 is the copy of ITR and computation of Mr. Sanjeev Kumar for AY 2014-15 perusal of which would show that he has surrendered total income of Rs. 3,61,00,000/- which includes above mentioned surrender of Rs. 78,99,000/-. Thus no addition could have been made in the hands of assessee on the basis of the said seized documents and same has rightly been deleted by Ld. CIT(A).
-
2025 (3) TMI 145
Assessment u/s 153A - addition on account of alleged bogus purchases - as alleged no incriminating material found during the search
HELD THAT:- Without there being any incriminating material found during the search and merely relying on the statements recorded alone cannot be the basis of addition. Moreover, in the present case, the statements recorded prior and after the search were heavily relied to make the addition without there being any incriminating material or any mismatch of purchase or closing stock brought on record to be treated as incriminating material found during the search.
In our considered view, the assessee has submitted all the relevant quantitative details of raw material supported by tax audit report for the impugned assessment years under consideration and no discrepancies were brought on record except on the basis of statements recorded from Mohan Lal Gupta and Devender Kumar prior to search and also heavily relied on the 3 STRs forwarded by the Investigation Wing.
There is no incriminating or corroborative evidence with the Revenue in conformity with the statements given by Mohan Lal Gupta and Devender Kumar. They made the statements prior to search and the Revenue must have gathered supporting evidence in line with the statements recorded.
Merely relying on circumstantial evidences without there being any corroborative evidence cannot be treated as incriminating material. Therefore, the assessment order is quashed.
............
|
9911796707
