9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 154X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credit set up by the appellant is against normal human conduct as no petty supplier/commission agent/ fruit vendor would give money four to nine months in advance for supply of vegetables - appellant is alleged to have received advances, had denied the factum of any transaction with the appellant – Appeal is dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. Consequently, the present appeal has been filed before us. 6. Mr. Suresh C. Ladi, learned counsel for appellant-assessee submitted that the Tribunal had erred in law in rejecting the explanation offered for credit entries amounting to 1,98,000/-. He further submitted that the Tribunal had failed to appreciate the distinction between trade and cash credits. According to Mr. Ladi, since the appellant had filed invoices indicating receipt of advances, the onus of proof was upon the revenue to show that the invoices and transactions were not genuine. 7. Having heard Mr. Suresh C. Ladi, learned counsel for appellant and having perused the appeal papers, we are of the opinion that the issue raised in the present appeal is essentially a quest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... persons have given money in advance to the assessee with understanding that the vegetables would be supplied to them later on and even in subsequent assessment year, is totally against human probability as it is totally against normal transaction that a vegetable or fruit vendor would advance money to the assessee for supplying the vegetables after a gap of about four to nine months. The assessee has credited the amount in the month of March, 1996, but has claimed that the vegetables have been sold to them in the month of December, 1996, August, 1996 and that too in respect of the potato, onion, garlic and cabbage. It is hardly believable that to purchase cabbage in the month of August to December, 1996 a person would advance certain money ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ces has been accepted in cash. Therefore, the burden upon the assessee was even heavy to prove the fact that whether any transaction has actually been taken place in cash between the assessee and the alleged persons. In the light of the circumstances and the reasons given above, strong suspicion and adverse inferences are necessary to be drawn as to the genuineness of the transaction of sales covered by the invoices filed by the assessee. The assessee has not been able to explain the circumstances or the reasons as to why these persons had given advances to the assessee in the month of March, 1996 for getting the goods supplied after the period of four to 8 months, which does not satisfy the taste of human probability as well as the normal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l human conduct as no petty supplier/commission agent/ fruit vendor would give money four to nine months in advance for supply of vegetables like cabbage. 9. t is also pertinent to mention that in the first round of litigation itself, which resulted in the remand order by the Tribunal dated 20th January, 2006, the Statutory Authority had pointed out that some of the parties from whom the appellant is alleged to have received advances, had denied the factum of any transaction with the appellant. Despite the said finding in the first round of litigation and despite the remand order, we find that the appellant-assessee had neither filed any evidence with regard to existence and/or business dealings with the aforesaid parties nor it had filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
