9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 1080X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee maintained books of account which were audited. The A.O. noted that there is a better G.P, N.P. and turnover in assessment year under appeal. Therefore, book results were accepted. The A.O. after going through the details and Annexures of the Audit Report found that assessee has shown unsecured loans in the name of several parties. The A.O. asked the assessee to file confirmation with copy of the ITR and bank statements of the lenders. The assessee furnished the details asked for by the A.O. The assessee explained that unsecured loans/advances were received from the customers against the purchase of the goods. Ultimately, when goods could not be purchased, the amounts have been refunded to them. All the transactions are carried out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tted that assessee filed copy of ledger account, confirmations, ITR, bank statement and other documents to prove that assessee received genuine advances through banking channel. No cash was found to have been deposited in their account and these parties have frequent business transactions with the assessee. Since no goods were supplied, therefore, amounts have been returned to them in subsequent year. Entries in the books of account were not found wrong or fake. The assessee requested the A.O. to conduct direct enquiry from the parties, but, no steps have been taken despite assessee deposited Rs. 400/- in respect of enquiry to be conducted from these parties. The amount have been returned through banking channel. Learned Counsel for the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C. Where assessee shows his inability and request AO to conduct enquiry but fails to do so, Onus on assessee discharged. He cant make addition for non-production etc. OM Prakash Singh V ACIT-ITA NO.331/agra/2016 - order dt.22.03.2019 (Agra Bench) 21-27 MUNNA LAL MURIDHAR VS CIT (1971) 79 ITR 540 (ALL) NathuRam Premchand (1963) 49 ITR 561(ALL) D. NO addition u/s 68 for non-production of depositors/Confirmation/non-service of summons etc.. Where confirmation/Bank details etc. filed H.R. Mehta V ACIT [2016] 72 taxmann.com 110 (Bombay H.C.) Himachal Fibers Ltd. [2018] 98 taxmann.com 173 (SC) - Affirming DEL.H.C. CIT V Jalan Hard Coke Ltd. [2018] 95 taxmann.com 330 (Rajasthan) SLP dismissed in [2018] 95 taxmann.com 331 (SC) / [ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... circumstances is able to discharge onus upon it to prove the ingredients of Section 68 of the I.T. Act. We rely upon Judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Guj.) and Gauhati High Court in the case of Nemichand Kothari 264 ITR 254 (Gauhati). Since in this case the repayment made by assessee in subsequent year have not been disputed by the Revenue Department, therefore, case of assessee would also be covered by Judgment of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ayachi Chandrashekhar Narsangji (supra) and Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kapoor Chand Mangesh Chand (supra). The authorities below rejected the explanation of assessee because in response to notice issu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
