9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 524X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndered the amount before the Ld. CIT(A) as he could not obtain the confirmations from the parties due to his ill health and heart problems as confirmed by the medical certificates and medical reports filed. In view of the above, we find that Ld. CIT(A)’s has rightly deleted the addition of ₹ 15.16 and balance payment of ₹ 16.37 lacs was rightly confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A), which does not need any interference on our part, hence, the same is decided against the Revenue. As per the assessee’s submission the Bank certificate issued by Bank of Maharashtra from Faridabad Branch and Dehradun Branch, the assessee has proved to the satisfaction of the Ld. CIT(A) that payments of RS.15,15,851/- were made by account payee cheques. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red in deleting the addition of ₹ 15,15,851/- made by the AO on the ground that liabilities of ₹ 31,33,424/- as bogus / as ceased liabilities under section 41(1)(a) out of total sundry creditors of ₹ 46,98,427/-. 2. On the facts and on the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in relying on a certificate issued by the banker of assessee, by admitting additional evidence without allowing AO to examine the same, thus violating Rule 46A(3) of the IT Rule, 1962. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing of the appeal. 2. Briefly facts stated in this case are that the assessee is an individual engaged in the business of civil c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amine the same, thus violating Rule 46A(3) of the I.T. Rule, 1962. 5.1 On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has filed the Synopsis in support of his arguments, the same is reproduced here for the sake of convenience. 1. Assessee is engaged in the business of Civil Construction and the Contract receipts of the assessee amounted to RS.91.77 lacs during the assessment year under reference. 2. The Ld. Assessing Officer has made the addition of ₹ 31.35 Lacs vide orders dated 30.12.2010 in respect of 33 parties. 3. The Ld. CIT (A) has deleted addition of RS.15.16 lacs vide order dated 28.12.2012 and balance amount of ₹ 16.37 lacs was confirmed which was surrendered by the assessee before Ld. CIT(A).The assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of notices issued u/s 133(6) by the Ld. AO, which were returned undelivered or the differences were found in the outstanding balances were not even given to the assessee. The assessee also did not receive notice dated 06.072012 and 20.07.2012 issued by the Ld. Aa. to the assessee during remand proceedings. Hence the assessee was denied a reasonable and proper opportunity of being heard which is against the natural course of justice. The Ld. CIT(A) in fact gave sufficient opportunity to the Ld. AO. before admitting the additional evidence under Rule 46A and the Ld. AO. had filed remand report dated 06.08.2012 before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AO. in his remand report has not denied the fact that the copy of notices sent to the parties whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7; 15.16 lacs were made by account payee cheques and these payments have been confirmed by the assessee banker Bank of Maharastara and therefore, theses parties are neither bogus nor liabilities of these amounts had ceased. We also find considerable cogency in the submissions of the assessee that regarding the balance amount of ₹ 16.37 lacs, the assessee surrendered the amount before the Ld. CIT(A) as he could not obtain the confirmations from the parties due to his ill health and heart problems as confirmed by the medical certificates and medical reports filed. In view of the above, we find that Ld. CIT(A) s has rightly deleted the addition of ₹ 15.16 and balance payment of ₹ 16.37 lacs was rightly confirmed by the Ld. CI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt and the bills of the parties. 6.2 We also find that as per the assessee s submission the Bank certificate issued by Bank of Maharashtra from Faridabad Branch and Dehradun Branch, the assessee has proved to the satisfaction of the Ld. CIT(A) that payments of RS.15,15,851/- were made by account payee cheques. The assessee had also filed the copy of ledger account and the bills of the parties before Ld. CIT(A) as per details given in the excel sheet which was filed before Hon'ble CIT(A), a copy of which is attached herewith at Page 3-9. The assessee was also having very poor health due to heart problem and was admitted at Kailash Hospital, Noida as per discharge summary and medical reports of the Hospital filed before the Ld. CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
