9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 977X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dence from JSJAI, the Assessing Officer has immediately confronted the same to the assessee. Thereafter the ld. counsel for the assessee asked the Assessing Officer to afford an opportunity to cross-examine the responsible Director of JSJAI but he has not made any effort to obtain the confirmations from JSJAI or to ask him as to why he has shown sales in its name in its books of account. We also find force in the observations of the ld. CIT(A) that if JSJAI has done mischief with the assessee or has committed any fraud by showing wrong sales in its name, there could have been some criminal complaint or FIR against JSJAI. But nothing has been done by the assessee against JSJAI. Even till final hearing of the appeal before the Tribunal, the ld. counsel for the assessee could not place any evidence on record as to how and when he has recovered the outstanding debit balance of `17,98,142.70 from JSJAI nor did he claim it to be as bad debt if he failed to recover it for any reason. All these facts support the case of the Revenue that the assessee has made purchases as declared in the books of JSJAI out of its books of account and made sale thereof and earned profit. Since the assessee h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consideration to the material and information brought on record by the appellant , and the same does not deserve to be sustained. 5. BECAUSE the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding adhoc disallowance as had been made in the assessment as per particulars given below:- Sl.No. Head of expenditure Adhoc disallowance (Rs.) (i) General expenses 20,000 (ii) Office expenses 20,000 (iii) Travelling and conveyance 20,000 6. BECAUSE looking to the facts and circumstances of the case particularly that a) the appellant is a public limited company which had maintained books of account and other records, on day-to-day; b) no defect or discrepancy in such books of account had been fund at any stage; and c) the issue is covered (in favour of the appellant ) by the decision of Hon'ble ITAT, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, which has a binding effect. no disallowance either on facts or in law c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cer noticed that the assessee-company has purchased goods for a sum of `17,99,042 on different dates as mentioned above. A copy of the letter and copy of account received from JSJAI have been provided to the assessee and in response thereto the assessee has stated that the assessee-company has not purchased any goods from JSJAI. After considering the reply of the assessee, a letter dated 20.1.2006 was written to JSJAI and the fact as stated by the assessee has been intimated and JSJAI was required to submit the photocopy of invoices and necessary evidence regarding transportation of goods and receipts and dispatch of goods. Consequent thereto, JSJAI vide their letter dated 24.2.2006 has furnished the copy of bills and copy of transport receipts issued by M/s Deep Goods Carrier, Railway Road, Shamli. The photocopies of letter dated 24.2.2006 and copies of bills and transport receipts have been provided to the assessee vide letter dated 28.2.2006 and the assessee was required to explain as to why the amount of sale made by the above party to the assessee should not be added to the total income of the assessee being unaccounted purchase. In response thereto, the assessee has filed an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as objected to this adjustment bill raised by; J.S. Jain Agro. 5. This transaction took place in F.Y. 2002-03 it has been more than 10 years apparently assessee has made no effort to recover the payment from M/s J.S. Jain Agro. 6. During the proceedings before me, I asked the assessee to issue letter to M/s J.S. Jain Agro disputing this amount and to give a copy of same to me. Even this was declined by the directors of the company. 7. The assessee company on its part did not do anything to dispute the amount with the party at that point of time or during last 10 years or even during appellate proceedings. 8. The only conclusion that can be drawn from this conduct is that the assessee is raising a bogey of false bill before the department without disputing the same with the party who is actually showing the sale. Thus, this contention of assessee holds no ground. 9. I therefore find no merit in contention of assessee appeal on this ground is dismissed. 8. Accordingly the addition was confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). Aggrieved, the assessee has preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and reiterated its contentions. In support of the contention, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n effort could have been made by the assessee to recover the aforesaid outstanding amount from JSJAI. Therefore, the ld. CIT(A) has rightly taken cognizance of these facts while confirming the addition. The assessee has raised objections only for the sake of objection without discharging the onus to prove as to how the aforesaid amount was recovered if he has not purchased goods from JSJAI as shown in the statement filed by JSJAI. The assessee has alleged that JSJAI has manipulated its accounts, but the assessee has not lodged any protest either to JSJAI or lodged any complaint against it with any authorities. Under these circumstances, the ld. CIT(A) has rightly confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 11. Having given a thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions and from a careful perusal of record and the documents placed on record, we find that during the course of assessment proceedings, the assesseecompany filed the list of debtors and creditors vide their reply dated 30.5.2005 in which a sum of `17,98,142.70 was shown as debit balance receivable from JSJAI as on 31.3.2003. In order to verify the genuineness, the Assessing Officer has asked JSJAI to fur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e accounts of JSJAI during the period 2.5.2002 to 15.5.2002. The ld. CIT(A) has also observed that the assessee has raised technical objection to the evidences collected by the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings. From the orders of the lower authorities, we find that after collecting the evidence from JSJAI, the Assessing Officer has immediately confronted the same to the assessee. Thereafter the ld. counsel for the assessee asked the Assessing Officer to afford an opportunity to cross-examine the responsible Director of JSJAI but he has not made any effort to obtain the confirmations from JSJAI or to ask him as to why he has shown sales in its name in its books of account. We also find force in the observations of the ld. CIT(A) that if JSJAI has done mischief with the assessee or has committed any fraud by showing wrong sales in its name, there could have been some criminal complaint or FIR against JSJAI. But nothing has been done by the assessee against JSJAI. Even till final hearing of the appeal before the Tribunal, the ld. counsel for the assessee could not place any evidence on record as to how and when he has recovered the outstanding debit balanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
