9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (1) TMI 1198X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... year 2001-02. 2. The only issue in this appeal of the Revenue is against the order of CIT(A) in allowing the claim of the assessee on account of short payment made by the customers and also on account of payment of discount. For this, the Revenue has raised the following ground:- [1] On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in Law, the Ld. CIT(A)-IV, Surat has erred in allowing the claim of the assessee the short payments made by the customers to the tune of ₹ 15,95,088/- and also on account of payment of discounts made to the customers who initially made full payments to the tune of ₹ 19,24,387/- totaling to ₹ 35,19,475/- disallowed by the AO. 3. We have heard the rival contentions and gone thro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ses contained only one sales bill and the rest of the documents in the file were the copies of delivery notes which did not contain any details of discounts allowed to the customers and short payments received from the customers. It has been stated by the AO that the filing of delivery notes is of no use. The AO also observed that the assessee should have been shown discounts allowed by way of deduction. The AO also observed that there is a difference of few days between the date of issue of delivery notes and the cash discount vouchers. The AO also stated that it is not acceptable that the signatures of the customers on the discount vouchers would match with the signatures of the customers on delivery notes for the cars in all cases since ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts were transferred to discount account. It has been contended that the purchasers of the cars would not oblige the assessee by making payment of 95% to 98% of the bill value of the cars through cheques / drafts and by making payment of balance small su9ms to the tune of 2% to 5% of sale value by cash, so as to enable the assessee to evade the tax by claiming such amount as discounts. It has also been argued that the AO has not brought on record any material / evidences indicative of the fact that in respect of such customers, the assessee received more amounts than those recorded in the customer s accounts and that the sales considerations have been understated. The CIT(A) deleted the addition by giving following findings in pages-6-7 of h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #8377; 2,000/-, ₹ 3,000/-, ₹ 4,000/- which could not be received from the customers were transferred to the discount account. Again, it is a fact known to all that now a days the customers bargain heavily while purchasing the cars with the dealers on account of cut throat competition amongst the various car dealers of the various companies and also amongst more than one car dealers of the same company. In that view of the matter, what the appellant has been claiming is not something which is unusual or unacceptable. The claim of the appellant therefore that if allowed discounts of ₹ 15,95,088/- represented by short payments made by the customer is found to be correct and acceptable. We further find that the CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
