9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 363X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evel of the AO. We, accordingly, set aside the orders of the authorities below and restore the matter in issue to the file of Assessing Officer with a direction to re-decide the issue as per Law, by giving reasonable, sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to produce sufficient evidences and material on record to prove that the sundry creditors amounts were genuine and that assessee repaid the amounts subsequently through banking channel. The Assessing Officer shall also take into consideration the decisions relied upon by the Learned Counsel for the Assessee above. Appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical process. - ITA.No.6712/Del./2013 - - - Dated:- 3-4-2019 - Shri Bhavnesh Saini, Judi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The assessee was also directed to furnish confirmation from the parties on their Letter Heads along with copy of PAN card, acknowledgement of ITR, which may prove identity of the creditor. The Assessing Officer noted that assessee did not reconcile the differences. Therefore, Assessing Officer made addition of ₹ 32,47,203/- on account of unexplained sundry creditors. 3. The assessee challenged the addition before the Ld. CIT(A) and also filed an application under Rule 46A for admission of the additional evidences. The assessee explained that in the cases of two creditors namely M/s. Tanisha Travels Tradelinks and M/s. Infor Global Solutions (I) Pvt. Ltd., the letters dated 20th December 2011 were dispatched on 22nd December 2011 a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re, addition was confirmed. 4. Learned Counsel for the Assessee reiterated the submission made before the authorities below and submitted that even in the case of two creditors namely M/s. Tanisha Travels Tradelinks and M/s. Infor Global Solutions (I) Pvt. Ltd., though the Ld. CIT(A) admitted the additional evidences, but, their cases have not been decided on merits. The documentary evidences filed on record, have not been considered by the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) merely going through the remand report of the Assessing Officer, confirmed the addition. He has submitted that in the case of M/s. Tanisha Travels Tradelinks, copy of the invoices were filed and in case of M/s. Infor Global Solutions (I) Pvt. Ltd., assessee filed copy of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reply have been filed by them, the letters returned undelivered or no confirmation/reply have been filed. The assessee did not file the evidences of identity of the creditors. The Ld. CIT(A), however, in the cases of two of the creditors namely M/s. Tanisha Travels Tradelinks and M/s. Infor Global Solutions (I) Pvt. Ltd., admitted the additional evidences because there was no sufficient time to reply to the notice under section 133(6) of the Act as the same were issued just prior to passing of the assessment order. These are the major amounts, on which, addition have been made. Rest of the creditors are having very small amount. The Ld. CIT(A) despite admitting the additional evidences on the same, did not pass the order on merit and merel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
