9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 464X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led on 30.10.2005 declaring total income at 8,93,51,850/- and agricultural income at 4,17,76,016/-. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed from the return filed, that out of 4,99,22,892/- shown as gross agricultural receipt. The assessee has claimed expenses to the tune of 81,46,877/- and had declared net agricultural income at 4,17,76,015/-. On verification of the record, he further noticed that assessee has invested 1,16,58,623/- in agricultural land and 1,22,95,154/- in machinery, pipelines, etc. in agricultural division. In view of net profit percentage of 83.67% vis-à-vis expenses shown @ 16.33%, the Assessing Officer proceeded to verify agricultural income in detail. He has looked into the details in the following background: i) Total land holding and land under cultivation ii) Agricultural production iii) Verification of sale bills Having dealt with the issue of agricultural income with above analysis, the Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee had declared excess agricultural income to the tune of 3,02,73,124/-. He treated this income as assessee's undisclosed income fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Marg, Dadar-West, Mumbai-28 and 'Jasmine Flora', 17, Vijaynagar, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai-28 are printed on computer in a similar fashion. Their address and telephone numbers were identical. c) In the bills issued to the appellant by M/s Chander Bhan Sharma, Miraj, the word 'Commission' was erased and was overwritten as 'discount'. The assessing officer had deputed his office Inspector to verify and obtain the copies of bills. It is further mentioned in the assessment order that - d) As many as 25 letters issued to the sale parties under section 133(6) calling for information in respect of the transactions made with the appellant did not evoke any response. The letters were returned unserved (except in the cases of viz. M/s R B Shahapure (Bubanalkar) Station Road, Jayasingpur-01, M/s Prashant Gadage, Ganganiwas, Near Krishna Hospital Sangli and Shri Chander Bhan Sharma, Miraj). Hence the existence of the sale parties was doubtful. e) The appellant was required to obtain the confirmations from all the sale parties. However, the confirmation letters were sans signature, address, PAN etc. In some c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llected by the Assessing Officer was made available to the assessee during assessment. However, despite given sufficient time and opportunity the assessee could not justify its claim. Regarding the assessee's plea that evidences etc. could not be produced due to paucity of time was not found acceptable by the Assessing Officer. He has mentioned in his report that as per records, a questionnaire was issued on 04.10.2007 wherein the assessee was specifically required to give details of sale parties. On the directions issued by the said office to examine the sale parties, the assessing officer has submitted that the powers of CIT(A) are co-terminus with that of an Assessing Officer and if deemed fit, these powers could be exercised by the CIT(A) in order to verify the sale parties in the Assessing Officer's presence. It was finally stated that the issue be decided on merits of the case. 4.3 In this background, the CIT(A) observed that the Assessing Officer did not utilize the opportunity provided to him by the office to examine the parties to whom sales were made. The purpose of a remand is to ensure that adequate opportunity is provided to both parties to examine the case an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... if it is not unusual to conduct distribution operation from one address. The Assessing Officer has also noted that 25 letters were issued u/s. 133(6) to various persons which had come back with the comment 'not known'. However, the confirmations given by the assessee reveal that some of the signatures and sale bills did not match with the signatures in the confirmation. On this aspect, it was observed that it was not necessary that the same person who had issued the sale patties had received the delivery of flowers would have signed the confirmation as well. It was not clear as to whether the Assessing Officer had required the assessee to produce the PAN number of the persons through whom the flowers were sold. In any case, it was clear from the assessment order that the Assessing Officer did not require these persons to be produced for verification. As noted above, in order to obviate any doubt which have arisen due to the inconsistencies mentioned above, the predecessor of CIT(A) had allowed the Assessing Officer an opportunity to examine all these persons and then to offer his comments on the on the point of genuineness of the transactions entered into by the assessee wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
