9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1311X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the P&L Account. However, the sales of milk worth ₹ 21,65,485/- made to Apollo Hospital was not included in the P&L Account. After accounting for the commission income at 0.94 per cent the net addition of ₹ 11,97,312/- was directed to be made. As regards addition on account of undisclosed closing stock, the CIT(A) noted that an incorrect figure had been given by the Assessee by mixing the figures of monthly sales with monthly purchases in some months or by mixing up opening or closing stock at the end of the month with the relevant monthly purchases. The actual closing stock out of the consignment purchases amounted to ₹ 31,755/- which had been duly disclosed in the balance sheet. The An explanation offered by letter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce. Unable to find any legal error committed by the ITAT - Decided against revenue - ITA No. 183/2013 - - - Dated:- 16-11-2015 - S. Muralidhar And Vibhu Bakhru, JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Raghvendra Singh, Junior Standing Counsel and Mr. Shikhar Garg, Adv For the Respondent : Mr. M.P. Rastogi and Mr. K.N. Ahuja, Adv ORDER 1. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 18th May, 2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in ITA No.1513/Del/2007 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2003-04. By the order dated 15th April, 2014 while admitting the appeal, this Court framed the following questio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee on 29th November, 2004. 4. Apropos the two issues that have been urged by the Revenue for consideration in this appeal, a perusal of the assessment order dated 30th March, 2006 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) reveals that pursuant to the questionnaire, by a letter dated 15th February, 2006, the Assessee informed the AO that the consignment purchases and the corresponding sales for the year ending 31st March, 2003 were ₹ 3,49,90,459/- and ₹ 3,38,05,598/- respectively. The AO after examining the entries in the books of accounts and after considering the explanation of the Assessee concluded that the accounts did not present a true and correct picture. The AO rejected the claim of the Assessee that the consignment p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e garb of consignment vendors. Besides the aforementioned creditors, the AO also considered the issue of further three creditors to the extent of ₹ 19,80,733/- who remained unverified and unsubstantiated. The AO also held them to be bogus creditors and this amount of ₹ 19,80,733/- was also directed to be added to the income of the Assessee. The net addition on account of bogus creditors was worked out to ₹ 1,22,52,846/-. 6. The Assessee s appeal was allowed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) [CIT (A)] by the order dated 29th December, 2006. Before the CIT (A), the Assessee furnished further documents such as sales tax assessment order, confirmed copies of accounts from vendors etc. A remand report was submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A) noted that an incorrect figure had been given by the Assessee by mixing the figures of monthly sales with monthly purchases in some months or by mixing up opening or closing stock at the end of the month with the relevant monthly purchases. The actual closing stock out of the consignment purchases amounted to ₹ 31,755/- which had been duly disclosed in the balance sheet. The An explanation offered by letter dated 15th February, 2006 had been accepted by the AO. The figures had been corrected on 22nd March, 2006 during the course of assessment proceedings. On this a remand report was requisitioned. After considering the report of the AO the CIT (A) was satisfied that the discrepancy in the figures had been satisfactorily explained b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led proceedings before the CIT (A) and the factual findings in that regard. The ITAT concurred with the view of the CIT (A). 10. With respect to both the grounds on which the questions have been framed by this Court, nothing has been shown to the Court by the Revenue to persuade it to hold that the finding of the CIT (A), which has been affirmed by the ITAT, suffers from any perversity. The CIT (A) appears to have undertaken an elaborate exercise of verifying the facts after calling for a remand report from the AO. 11. In the circumstances, the Court is unable to find any legal error committed by the ITAT in respect of its conclusions on either of the issues. Both the questions are accordingly answered in the negative i.e. in favour o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
