9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 592X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evidence in contravention to the requirements of Rule 46A particularly the details, inter alia, regarding repayment of loan through account payee cheque. Therefore, restore this matter to the file of AO for deciding the issue afresh, after taking consideration the evidence as were furnished before CIT(A). In favour of revenue for statistical purposes. Commission paid disallowed - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- As far as commission paid to Shri Pramod Kumar is concerned the main reason for disallowance was that no reply was filed by the party in pursuance to the notice issued under section 133(6). Mere filing of details does not absolve the assessee of the onus cast on it to substantiate the claim for payment of commission. Thus restore the matter back to the file of AO and direct the assessee to produce Shri Pramod Kumar for proper verification of facts. In favour of revenue for statistical purposes. Addition made to the assessable income being 20% of commission paid to other eight persons - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- Once the persons responded to notice under section 133(6), it cannot be accepted that they did not accept the contents of information ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Stock Reconciliation Statement reproduced at Page No 4 of the assessment order. The assessing officer noticed that assessee had shown different figures of sales and purchases as compared to the figures submitted earlier. He noted that in the month of January' 2007 February' 2007 purchases and sales in the in the month of January' 2007 had been shown in earlier statement but in reconciliation statement, no sales and purchases was shown from January' 2007 to March' 2007. He has observed that the assessee had not provided any explanation for these discrepancies. 4. The assessing officer, therefore, rejected the books of account invoking section 145(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 observing as under :- "The assessee's argument that Sales Bills have to be prepared as per the requirements of Customs Department is also not understood. In the copy of sales bills submitted by the assessee the description readymade garments is mentioned and number of pieces is also mentioned. Similarly in the Purchase Bills submitted by the assessee very clear description of the item is mentioned. Therefore, it is not understood as to how the discrepancies can occur because of billing according to Customs D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (A), the revenue has filed the appeal before us and has taken following grounds of appeal:- "1. The ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on the facts and circumstances of he case in deleting the addition of Rs. 12,55,073/- made by the AO on account of low gross profit as un-explained income after rejecting the books of accounts under section 145(3) of the IT Act, 1961. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,15,00,000/- made by the AO as un-explained credit appearing in the books of accounts as income of the assessee u/s 68 of the IT Act, 1961 in contravention of provisions of Rule 46A of Income Tax Rules, 1962. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case in deleting the addition of Rs. 80,000/- made by the AO to the assessable income of the assessee on account of commission paid to Sri Pramod Kumar. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,41,056/- made by the AO to the assessable income of the assessee being 20% of Rs. 12,05,280/- commission paid to other eight persons. 5. The appellant craves leave to am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... we consider it in the interest of justice that the matter be restored back to the file of the assessing officer for due verification of reconciliation statement. We directed accordingly. 15. In the result this ground is allowed for statistical purposes. 16. Apropos ground No. 2 before ld CIT(A) the assessee had stated that he had filed the confirmation before assessing officer during the course of assessment proceedings. The assessee also adduced the copy of accounts of M/s. Mount View Group Housing Society and M/s. Sun City Projects confirming the transactions before ld. CIT(A). The assessee had also furnished evidences showing that the loan amounting to Rs. 40,00,000/- was paid back on 29.05.2006 through account payee cheque to M/s. Mount View Group Housing Society. It was further submitted that the loan amounting to Rs. 75,00,000/- was paid back to M/s. Sun City Projects by account payee cheque. Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition, inter alia, taking note of following facts: 1. The confirmations were on record. 2. The assessee had furnished PAN and address of both the creditors. 3. The transaction was through banking channel. 4. The loans had been repaid. 17. Ld DR su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to 7 % of the sale value. Thus, the addition was deleted taking in to consideration the nature of the payment vis- -vis the needs of the business. As regards the commission paid to Shri Pramod Kumar, the assessee had furnished a copy of his return of income filed in Ward 19(2); his bank statement and PAN. Considering all these details he deleted the addition in respect of Shri Pramod Kumar also. Observing that the assessee had discharged the onus cast on it. 22. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the record of the case. As far as commission of Rs. 80,000/- to Shri Pramod Kumar is concerned, we find that the main reason for disallowance was that no reply was filed by the party in pursuance to the notice issued under section 133(6). Mere filing of details does not absolve the assessee of the onus cast on it to substantiate the claim for payment of commission. After hearing both the parties, we restore the matter back to the file of assessing officer and direct the assessee to produce Shri Pramod Kumar before the assessing officer for proper verification of facts. 23. In the result ground No. 3 stands allowed for statistical purpose. 24. As far as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
