9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 111X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the payments were made through cheque and that there was some further evidence of receipt of goods. No interference is called for. This our view is also supported by the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of ACIT v. Akruti Dyeing & Printing Mills Pvt. Ltd (2009 (1) TMI 104 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT ), wherein exactly the same issue, went before Hon'ble High Court and it is c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .32 lakhs. This was on the basis that purchases were made from the concern of one Shri Rohit Panwalla who had apparently given his statement to the department stating that such concerns were involved in issuing bogus sale bills of colour and chemicals without ever supplying the goods and further that for doing so he would be retaining a commission out of the payments made and returned the rest of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e to the persons who brought the goods by issuing account payee cheques in the name on in which the inovice was given to it. We find that no material could be brought on recored by the revenue to show that the assessee received cash back after issuing cheques. A plausible explanation given by the assessee cannot be rejected merely on the assumption or caprice without bringing any material to show ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Assessing Officer in the present case. Further it is not even case of the department that Shri Rohit Panwalla in any of the statements ever directly implicated present assessee. Further the assessee had pointed out that the payments were made through cheque and that there was some further evidence of receipt of goods. No interference is called for. Tax Appeal is dismissed. - - TaxTMI - TMIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
