9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 1506X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icer which were not rejected. The sales has been accepted by the Assessing Officer during the year. It is also not denied that the purchases have been made by the assessee for the purpose of sales. If the sales has been accepted by the Assessing Officer and quantitative reconciliation has been filed about the purchase and sales, the assessee cannot make the sales without making the purchase. The Revenue has to levy the tax on the real income. The income has to be computed only by deducting out of the gross receipt the expenses incurred by the assessee including the purchases. The assessee has made purchases not only from M/s Annapurna Trading Co. but from 13 parties. None of the parties were held to be bogus. If the purchases are to be recorded to be bogus, the assessee, in our opinion, cannot make the sales. Without purchase being made, the sales cannot be made. This is not the case where the assessee has not given quantitative details in respect of purchase and sales and quantitative details are not tallied. In view of this fact, we do not find any infirmity or illegality in the order of CIT(A) in deleting the addition - Decided against revenue - ITA No.840/Lkw/2014, C.O.48/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clause A to D are complied with. Sub Rule (3) of section 46A debars the CIT(A) not to take into account any evidence produced u/s 40A(1) unless the Assessing Officer has been allowed a reasonable opportunity to examine these evidences or to cross examine the witness produced by the assessee or to produce any evidence or document or any evidence in rebuttal of the additional evidence produced by the assessee. We noted from the order of CIT(A) that in this case the assessee made the written submissions before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) asked for the remand report of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer has given the remand report dated 16/072014. The said remand report has been produced by the CIT(A) under para 6.1 page 13 of his order. In view of this fact, it is not the case where the CIT(A) has not given an opportunity to the Assessing Officer. We, therefore, dismiss ground No. 1 taken by the Revenue. 6. Ground No. 2 3 relate to the same issue regarding the deletion of addition of ₹ 4,19,94,000/-. The facts related to this issue, in brief, are that the assessee is running a roller flour mill for manufacture and trading of Atta, Maida, Suji. The assessee is also r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. Total sales of the assessee ₹ 57,02,93,957/-, other receipts ₹ 1,57,16,340/- and sales receipts on account of trading at ₹ 9,91,25,935/-. Here, the basic point of contention relates to sales receipt on account of trading amounting to ₹ 9,91,25,935/- credited by the assessee which includes trading receipts on account of purchases made from M/s. Annapurna Trading Company. The A.R. of the assessee has explained and substantiated that in addition to the sale of manufactured items of Aata, Maida and Suzi sold to M/s. Parle, Biscuits Pvt. Ltd., to meet the further requirement of M/s. Parle Biscuits Pvt. Ltd., the required quality of Maida is purchased directly from the market and supplied to the M/s. Parle Biscuits Pvt. Ltd., to hold the share by the assessee with M/s. Parle Biscuits Pvt. Ltd. During the year, the purchases of bakery Maida ( as required by M/s. Parle Biscuits Pvt. Ltd.) have been made by the assessee from 13 parties which includes M/s. Annapurna Trading Company. These parties are mentions as under :- Sl.No. Name of the Party No. of Bags QTY. (In M.T.) TOTAL VALUE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6705.550 03 Cash 15 0.750 Total 158166 7906.300 The claim of the A.R. of the assessee of trading of all the purchases made on account of bakery Maida has been sold to M/s. Parle Biscuits Pvt. Ltd., has not been denied or demolished by the AO. The assessee has not made any value addition to the purchases made from all the above 13 parties including M/s. Annapurna Trading Company, thereby, if the purchases made from M/s. Annapurna Trading Company is bogus, how can sale proceeds of the same quantity can be included in the sale proceeds of the assessee. The AO is silent on this point and has been only insisting that the purchases shown from M/s. Annapurna Trading Company is bogus without even verifying the status of assessment of M/s. Annapurna Trading Company. The AR of the assessee has submitted that the books of accounts of M/s. Annapurna Trading Company has neither been rejected nor his receipts has been disturbed. Shri Har Narain Gupta, Proprietor of M/s. Annapurna Trading Company has appeared in reassessment proceedings a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Assessing Officer while Learned A. R. of the assessee relied on the order of learned CIT(A). 8. We have heard the rival submissions, carefully considered the same along with the orders of the tax authorities below. We noted that this is a case where the Assessing Officer has not rejected the books of account of the assessee. The assessee has submitted all the details of the purchases and the sales. All the quantitative details of purchase and sales were filed. The books were duly produced before the Assessing Officer which were not rejected. The sales has been accepted by the Assessing Officer during the year. It is also not denied that the purchases have been made by the assessee for the purpose of sales. If the sales has been accepted by the Assessing Officer and quantitative reconciliation has been filed about the purchase and sales, the assessee cannot make the sales without making the purchase. The Revenue has to levy the tax on the real income. The income has to be computed only by deducting out of the gross receipt the expenses incurred by the assessee including the purchases. The assessee has made purchases not only from M/s Annapurna Trading Co. but from 13 parties. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
