9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 1597X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... P&L a/c is ₹ 48,35,023/- whereas the amount shown in the Form No.26AS excluding TCS is to the tune of ₹ 47,31,926/- - thus the difference of ₹ 1,03,095/- is being added to the income of the assessee - since the assessee is not able to reconcile the difference - hence appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed. - ITA No. 1035/Kol/2016 - - - Dated:- 23-5-2018 - SHRI A. T. VARKEY, JM And DR. A.L.SAINI, AM Appellant by :Shri U. Dasgupta, Advocate Respondent by :Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT(DR) ORDER Per Dr. A. L. Saini: The captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2011-12, is directed against an order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Asansol, in Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal, the assessee has raiseda multiple grounds of appeal but at the time of hearing, the main grievance of the assessee has been confined to Ground Nos.1, 2, 5 6 and other grounds were not pressed. 4.Ground No.1 raised by the assessee relates to disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Act at ₹ 42,06,080/-. 5. The brief facts qua the issue are that assessee is an individual and filed its return of income on 10.03.2012. The assessee s case was selected for scrutiny u/s 143(2) of the Act and Assessing Officer completed theassessment by making various additions / disallowances. One of the disallowances made by the Assessing Officer relates to u/s 40A(3) of the Act as the assessee made payment against purchases an amount exceeding ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd added to the total income of an assessee. The AO accordingly added a sum of ₹ 38,63,895/- to the total income of the assessee by way of disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Act. On appeal by the assessee the CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO. 4. At the time of hearing it was brought to our notice that similar issue came up for consideration in assessee's own case for A.Y.2008-09 in ITA No.903/Kol/2013 dated 28.09.2016 and the tribunal was pleased to hold that the disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Act cannot be sustained. The Tribunal following the decision rendered in another case of Prabir Kr. Mallik vs ITO in ITA No.1603/Kol/2011 order dated 01.06.2016 deleted the disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Act. In short the tribunal held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer noted that the assessee has undisclosed purchase from IFB to the tune of ₹ 1,24,200/-, which has not been explained properly by the assessee, therefore the Assessing Officer made addition on account of undisclosed purchase at ₹ 1,24,200/-. The assessee has purchased empty bottles to the tune ofRs.81,550/- which has not been disclosed by the assessee in his Profit Loss Account therefore, the Assessing Officer made addition at ₹ 81,550/-. On perusal of the documents submitted by the assessee, there was a difference in purchase of C.S, which is as per Form No.26AS and as per return of income of ₹ 50,59,947/- and ₹ 42,06,080/- respectively. The assessee did not provide satisfactory explanation therefore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹ 47,31,926/-). This is the difference between the amount debited in profit and loss account and net amount of purchases, excluding TCS. The ld. counsel has agreed that the said difference amount of ₹ 1,03,095/-, may be disallowed as the assessee is not able to reconcile the difference. 14. Learned Departmental Representative did not have much to say but he nevertheless relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 15. Having heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record, we note that the total purchases debited in the Profit Loss account including the purchase of ₹ 1,24,200/-, the purchases of empty bottle amounting to ₹ 81,550/- and the difference in purchase of C.S, of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
