9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 291X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CITA in this regard. - Decided against revenue. Addition made towards bogus purchase of sulphur and cement - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- Assessee filled complete details of purchases made by the assessee from different parties together with the details of sales made out of such purchases. The said paper book also contained the details of payments made to those suppliers for purchases made by the assessee by account payee cheques. We have perused the entire paper book filed by the assessee in this regard. We also observe that the Learned CIT(A) had called for a remand report from the Learned AO with regard to the production of these documents and the Learned AO did not offer any comments on the same. We also find that the su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹ 21,44,400/- and had accounted the same as its business receipts in Asst Year 2007-08 and claimed the TDS. The said contract receipt of ₹ 21,44,400/- was duly subjected to deduction of tax at source by M/s Arvind Construction Co Pvt Ltd. The Learned AO formed an opinion that the assessee had claimed TDS on the subject mentioned receipt in Asst Year 2006-07 and accordingly brought to tax the corresponding receipt of ₹ 21,44,400/- as income in Asst Year 2006-07 as against the income offered in Asst Year 2007-08 by the assessee. On first appeal, the Learned CIT(A) deleted the said addition. Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us on the following grounds:- 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3.3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find from the paper book containing pages 1-41 filed by the Learned AR that M/s Arvind Construction Co. Pvt Ltd had duly received in April 2006 the invoice dated 3.4.2006 raised by the assessee. We also find that the payment for the same had been received by the assessee after TDS in April 2006. We find that the assessee has duly accounted for this receipt in its profit and loss account in consonance with the mercantile system of accounting regularly employed by it. We also hold that the assessee had not claimed the TDS on the subject mentioned receipt in Asst Year 2006-07 as stated by the Learned AO and instead claimed the same with offer of corres ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. 4.2. The Learned DR vehemently supported the order of the Learned AO. In response to this, the Learned AR took us to the relevant pages of the paper book submitted by him before us containing pages 1 to 41 and pleaded that no interference is called for in the Learned CIT(A) order. 4.3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that the paper book filed by the assessee contained complete details of purchases made by the assessee from different parties together with the details of sales made out of such purchases. The said paper book also contained the details of payments made to those suppliers for purchases made by the assessee by account payee cheques. We have perused the entire pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
