9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 472X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee has paid these creditors out of unaccounted money or the balance shown in the balance sheet as sundry creditors were fictitious entries. Assessee has submitted before the CIT(A) that these balances consisted of earlier years’ balances also but the AO has not made further inquiries in the matter by issuing summons etc. to the creditor parties to verify the genuineness or otherwise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter hearing the learned DR. 3. The only ground of the appeal of the Revenue is as under: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.22,00,476/- made on account of bogus creditors. The ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the assessee did not comply the show cause notice issued by the AO in this respect. Thus, the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in a summary manner by observing that the AO was not justified in making the addition without proving them to be either non-existent or attributing them to be of bogus nature. 5. We have considered submissions of the learned DR and have perused the order of the AO and the CIT(A). We find that the creditors shown in the schedule attached with the balance sheet for the relevant period were on acc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on record by the AO that any creditors were found bogus subsequent on material gathered. The CIT(A) has held that the AO was not justified in making the addition without proving them to be either non-existent or attributing them to be of bogus nature. The CIT(A) has further observed that the AO has to adhere to the principle of natural justice before adding sundry creditors to the income of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. The assessee has not filed any application for adjournment of the case or intimated reason for the non-appearance in the matter. In the circumstances, it is inferred that the assessee is not interested in pursing its CO. Therefore, following the decision of Delhi Bench in the case of Multiplan (India) Ltd. 38 ITD 320, we dismiss the CO of the assessee in limine for want of prosecution. 7. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
