2014 (7) TMI 590

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... act about the discrepancies in his order, it was the duty of the FAA to deal the issue on merits before allowing the appeal filed by the assessee - it was essential as the assessee had not filed details before the AO – thus, the matter is to remitted back to the FAA for fresh adjudication – Decided partly in favour of Revenue.
Sh. I. P. Bansal And Rajendra,JJ. For the Petitioner : Ms. Nirja Pradhan For the Respondent : Shri Vimal Punmiya ORDER Per Rajendra, AM Challenging the order dt. 04. 07. 2011of the CIT(A)-7, Mumbai, Assessing officer (AO)has raised following Grounds of Appeal : 1. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 41, 53, 983/- made .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... available on record, he held that the in respect of purchases shown notices were issued u/s. 133(6) of the Act to number of parties, that in respect of some of the parties the amount of purchases shown were found to be matching with the sales shown by such parties to assessee-company, that as there was no discrepancy the name of such parties were not included in the show cause notice issued, that only those parties;in whose respect there were differences or no reply had been received or notices returned back unserved;were included in the show cause notice. He further held that the assessee had failed to submit any reason in respect of the discrepancies pointed out to it that the notices to all the parties were sent only at the addresses gi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the AO had specifically mentioned the said fact in the assessment order, that FAA had not given any finding about the discrepancy, that he did not call for any remand report from the AO about the papers filed before him, that assessment of earlier or subsequent years were of no use to decide the issue. Authorised Representative(AR) stated that the assessee has business relation with the parties in question and the AO had not doubted the genuineness of the parties, that AO did not given sufficient time to the assessee for furnishing necessary details. 2. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us. We find that while deciding the appeal FAA had not discussed anything about the discrepancies noted and communicat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X