9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 956X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ank statement, copies of acknowledgment of income tax returns and reconciliation statement. He specifically mentioned that vide letters dated 27.2.13 and 23.9.2013 the AO had furnished all the necessary details. Before us, the DR on the basis of the assessment records, admitted that both the letters and the annextures to the letters were available on the file of the AO. In thses circumstances, we are of the opinion that the findings of facts recorded by the FAA with regard to the purchases in question present the true picture and the comments of the AO made in his letter 13.11.2013 were factually incorrect. It is also a fact that the AO had not rejected the books of accounts maintained by the assessee, nor has doubted the genuineness of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -worthiness of the creditors, he called for information u/s. 133(6) from some of the parties, on test check basis, from whom the assessee had made purchases. He found that in most of the cases notices were served but the parties had not filed any details. The AO was of the opinion that purchases to the extent of ₹ 17.38 crores, in respect of 16 parties, had not been proved. He issued a show cause notice u/s. 142(1)of the Act. After considering the submissions of the assessee dt . 22.01.2013, 30.01.2013 and 27.02.2013, the AO held that in majority of cases notice issued u/s. 133(6)were either returned unserved/not replied, that the respective parties had furnished incomplete details, that the assessee had not furnished evidence of tot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mentioned, that the report was countersigned by both the parties, that final material arrival report was being maintained by the assessee, that the AO had wrongly disallowed the genuine purchases and had brushed aside the reliable evidences, that by letter dt.27.2.2013 the AO was made aware of the submission of the confirmations, that in respect of differences in closing balance reconciliation statement had been filed. The FAA, vide his letter, dt.7.10.2013, forwarded the material to the AO and to offer his comments. The AO made his submissions about the material sent by the FAA by his letter, dt. 13.11.2013. In his remand report, the AO stated that the assessee had made an application for rectification u/s. 154 of the Act, that it was f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chases of ₹ 17.38 crores without any valid reason and without rejecting the genuineness of the purchases, that the AO had not established the facts that the purchases made by the assessee were bogus, the assessee had been able to refute each and every argument with necessary evidence, that the AO vide its order 27.9.13 had rectified the mistakes u/s.154 of the Act, that the AO had reduced addition of ₹ 7.54 cr. (Rs.1.00cr +6.54cr), that the assessee had submitted copy of ledger account of all 16 suppliers along with the confirmation, that the assessee had filed copies of relevant extract of respective bank account of the suppliers, that the basic evidences were provided to the AO, that the assessee had filed reconcilliation stat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or purchases, that the AO had not called for the stock register, that there was difference of ₹ 9,154/- with regard to purchase expenditure, that the reconciliation about said transaction was filed. The FAA further held that AO had not rejected the veracity of books of account nor had made any observation of incorrectness or incompleteness of books of account u/s. 145(3) of the Act. The FAA referred to the case Sanchita Marine Products Pvt. Ltd. (15 SOT 280) and Hi Lux Automatic (P.)Ltd. (IT Appeal No.A33 of 2007 of Hon ble Delhi High Court dt.23.3.2009. He also referred to the case of Nikunj Exim Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. of the Hon ble Jurisdictional Hugh Court. Finally, the FAA directed the AO to delete the entire disallowance made und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ement. He specifically mentioned that vide letters dated 27.2.13 and 23.9.2013 the AO had furnished all the necessary details. Before us, the DR on the basis of the assessment records, admitted that both the letters and the annextures to the letters were available on the file of the AO. In thses circumstances, we are of the opinion that the findings of facts recorded by the FAA with regard to the purchases in question present the true picture and the comments of the AO made in his letter 13.11.2013 were factually incorrect. It is also a fact that the AO had not rejected the books of accounts maintained by the assessee, nor has doubted the genuineness of the sales made by it. In the matter of Nikunj Exim Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. (Income Tax App ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
