9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 91X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs.11,41,837/- on account of bogus expenses. The AO observed that amount outstanding in the names of many sundry creditors were in round figures and the notice sent to them returned un-served. Total liability in respect of these parties was claimed at Rs.11,16,836/-. The assessee explained that the labourers have no permanent residence; therefore, they are not traceable. The AO was of the view that the assessee had paid the labourers for repairs of the D. G. sets and they would be skilled workers. Part payment was made after long period. If such parties have no fixed address they would not wait for longer period for payment. Similarly, for transportation charges the transporters would not change their address frequently. In the case of two ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ern. It was found that purchases were made from this concern through valid invoices and bills and payments have been made through account payee cheques. Therefore, no addition was called for in the matter. As regards commission payment also it was found that same was made to them for business brought for the assessee and both the commission agents have been paid in subsequent year through account payee cheques. Addition was accordingly deleted. 4. The learned DR relied upon the findings of the AO and submitted that genuineness of the expenses have not been proved by the assessee. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the authorities below and referred to reply (PB 4 and 5) and submi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne oil cooler for Rs.80,000/- on 27-04-2004 and had claimed to have sold three oil coolers for Rs.5,28,000/- on 05-03-2005. There was no purchase of the item between these two dates and no bill was filed for purchase of the remaining two oil coolers. The AO, therefore, held that two oil coolers valued at Rs.80,000/- each were purchased from undisclosed sources and made the addition. Further, the AO issued notice u/s 133 (6) of the IT Act to M/s. Akil Corporation for verifying the purchase made by the assessee. The said concern has shown two sales to the assessee but the assessee recorded only one purchase in the books. The assessee made payment by Demand Draft but the AO was of the view that Rs.1,18,000/- was paid out of undisclosed income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CIT(A) on verification of the books of accounts, bills and vouchers found the contention of the assessee to be correct. The assessee filed ledger account, copy of the draft and bills of M/s. Akil Corporation at pages 71, 72 and 73 of the paper book to show that purchase of Rs.1,18,000/- have been made which are recorded in the books and payments are made through banking channel. The learned CIT(A) on proper appreciation of the facts rightly deleted the addition. No infirmity is pointed out in the order of the learned CIT(A). Therefore, ground No.2 of the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. 9. On ground No.3, the revenue challenged the deletion of addition of Rs.2,20,000/- made on account of undervaluation of closing stock. Due to addition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
