9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 192X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... venue in its appeals is that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made u/s. 69C of the Act in respect of bogus purchases from M/s. Siddhi Enterprises, M/s Devchaya Trading Co. and M/s. D.C. Corporation, and the assessee in its appeal for the Assessment Year 2009-10 challenged the order of the Ld.CIT(A) in sustaining the disallowance u/s. 69C in respect of bogus purchases from M/s. Disha Transport Co. and M/s. D.K. Enterprises. 3. Briefly stated the facts are that, the assessee is engaged in the business of civil contracts and there was a survey action u/s. 133 of the Act conducted on 14.02.2013 and in the course of survey proceedings statement of Shri Vishal Balkisan Wardhawan, Director of the assessee was recorded, wherein it was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hese parties have been made by cheques and the purchases are genuine and also relied on the affidavit filed for retraction of admission made by the Director Shri Vishal Balkisan Wardhawan. However, the Assessing Officer did not accept the submissions of the assessee for the following reasons: - (i) The contention that he payment ware made by account payee cheques is not a fail-safe method of substantiating the assessee's claim as it is already accepted by the persons, whose statement, deposition or affidavit are mentioned above, that cash is returned after deducting commission/brokerage once cheques is realized. (ii) The assessee could not produce any delivery challan, lorry receipt, the mode of transport of goods, evidence of payment o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is placed on decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. La Medica [250 ITR 575] 4. Thus the Assessing Officer treated the purchases made from the above parties as unexplained expenditure u/s. 69C of the Act. 5. The matter was carried before the Ld.CIT(A) and in the course of Appellate Proceedings the assessee filed additional evidences in the form of confirmations, Income-Tax returns of the supplier's VAT Returns etc., and the Ld.CIT(A) called for the Remand Report and the assessee also submitted its rejoinder for the Remand Report. In the course of proceedings before the Ld.CIT(A) it was submitted by the assessee that the disallowance was made only based on the statements recorded from Shri Devang H. Kapasi and Smt Chhaya Devan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee from the above parties could by no means treated as non-genuine. Convinced with the submissions of the assessee the Ld.CIT(A) deleted the purchases made from M/s. Siddhi Enterprises, M/s Devchaya Trading Co. and M/s. D.C. Corporation in all these Assessment Years. However, the Ld.CIT(A) sustained the disallowance in respect of the purchases from M/s. Disha Transport Co. and M/s. D.K. Enterprises for the Assessment Year 2009-10. 6. The Ld.DR submits that the assessee did not produce any evidence before the Assessing Officer to substantiate the genuineness of the purchases made from these parties. The Ld.DR referring to the Assessment Order submits that assessee has simply said that the payments were made by account payee cheques ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ear and therefore the Learned Counsel for the assessee submits that the contention of the Revenue that only the accommodation bills were issued to assessee by Kapasi family is basically wrong and this is evident from the statements recorded from them. He reiterated the submissions made before the lower authorities and strongly placed reliance on the order of the Ld.CIT(A). 8. In reply the Ld.DR submits that assessee could not prove that the material has come from the parties/suppliers and no evidence of consumption was shown by the assessee and no evidence whatsoever in respect of the stock registers, consumption record, delivery challan etc., have been furnished before the Assessing Officer. It is submitted that even in the remand proceed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the statements, the Ld.CIT(A) deleted the addition in so far as the purchases made from the suppliers namely M/s. Siddhi Enterprises, M/s Devchaya Trading Co. and M/s. D.C. Corporation for all these Assessment Years. Ld.CIT(A) sustained the disallowance in respect of purchases made from M/s. Disha Transport Co. and M/s. D.K. Enterprises during the Assessment Year 2009-10. The order of the Ld.CIT(A) is a well-reasoned order and therefore no inference is called for in so far as the decision taken by the Ld.CIT(A) that the purchases cannot be treated as bogus/non-genuine, in respect of the parties/suppliers namely M/s. Siddhi Enterprises, M/s Devchaya Trading Co. and M/s. D.C. Corporation. 10. At the same time the assessee could not produce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
