9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 1149X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee could not be believed on their face value. However, we feel that the matter requires further investigation and inquiry at the hands of the Assessing Authority and, the learned Tribunal, instead of reversing the order of the learned CIT (A), ought to have remanded the matter back to the Assessing Authority in such facts and circumstances of the case to ascertain whether the trade liability towards the Sundry Creditors shown in the Balance Sheet had ceased in the eye of law or whether such trade liability genuinely continued or not. Dispose of this appeal with the remand of the case to the Assessing Authority without answering the Substantial Question of law, framed above. - T.C.A.No.1772 OF 2008 - - - Dated:- 5-9-2019 - Dr. Justice Vineet Kothari And Mr. Justice C. Saravanan For the Appellant : Mr.M.P.Senthilkumar, for Mr.N.Muthukumar For the Respondent : Mr.M.Swaminathan, Senior Standing Counsel, assisted by Mrs.S.Premalatha, Junior Standing Counsel. JUDGMENT DR.VINEET KOTHARI, J . Assessee has filed this appeal aggrieved by the order, dated 30.06.2008, pas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 004 furnished the address of five Sundry Creditors except the address of M/s.Velmuruga Corpon., Arcot. He has also not furnished the details of transaction with the above concerns. In the above circumstances, it is held that a sum of ₹ 2,41,000/- shown as Trade Creditor is not actually due. The assessee has not furnished the address of the following Sundry Creditors. 1. Shankar Trading : ₹ 1,80,000 2. Sunil : ₹ 1,62,000 Assessee was asked to furnish the address of the above two Sundry Creditors by this office letters dated 26.12.2003, 23.01.2004 and 23.02.2004. Assessee has not furnished even the address of the above persons for verification. In the above circumstances, it is held that there is no Sundry Creditors by name Shankar Trading and Sunil for the amounts ₹ 1,80,000/- and ₹ 1,62,000/- respectively. On verification with Sundry Creditors, it was found that no amount was due to M/s.Hari Traders, 18, Managappan Street, Chennai-79 as per their confirmation letter dated 14.01.2004. Whereas, assessee has shown them as Sundry Creditors for ₹ 1,35,332/-. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts. (iii) the purchases made were for assessment year relating to 1998-99 and 1999-2000 as vouched by purchase register. (iv) The purchases filed for sales tax authorities confirm the transactions. (v) that all purchases and sales were recorded and appellant had paid taxes on the same. (vi) that all relevant details relating to the creditor were produced during the assessment proceedings. The books of account and invoices produced were selfexplanatory. (vii) As regards Shankar Trading, the amount outstanding related to purchases made during the assessment year 2002-03 and 2003-04 of ₹ 38,000/- and ₹ 1,42,000/- respectively. (viii) As regards Sunil Electricals and Electronics, the amount outstanding related to purchases made in the assessment year 1997-98 and 1998-99 for which the payments were made in the assessment year 2003-04. (ix) as regards M/s.Velmuruga Corporation the amounts outstanding relates to purchases made for the assessment year 1997-98 and 1998-99. The payments for the above transactions made were settled in the assessment year 2002-03 but for a sum of ₹ 1,13,000/- which wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... turn of income. 7. In response thereto the appellant filed necessary clarifications which were considered. In its support the appellant argued that the returns of income filed for the assessment years 1997-98, 1998-99 and 1999-2000 had been accepted. The credits appearing in these aforesaid returns could not be rejected now without any basis. In support the copies of documents were once again filed for perusal. It is also stated that the books of accounts in respect of its business were produced before the A.O. and were subject to verification and the copies of accounts of such creditors for the earlier and subsequent period were not called for. 8. On careful consideration of the facts in issue, I find that in the instant case the appellant had complied with the notices issued which culminated in the order u/s 143 (3). The A.O. has himself acknowledged in the order that the books of accounts were produced which were examined. It was only conformations to some of the creditors could not be furnished. This matter was not pursued further by the A.O. who summarily concluded that the outstanding credits represented income and proceeded to finalise t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sheet, but the assessee failed to supply even the details of the Sundry Creditors shown in the Balance Sheet and, upon verification of two Sundry Creditors, whose addresses were supplied, it was found that those Creditors did not confirm any claim against the assessee, and upon the assessee being confronted with such averment made by the Sundry Trade Creditors, he did not even respond to the same and, therefore, the Assessing Authority was justified in assuming that the liability of the assessee had ceased in terms of Section 41 (1) of the Act and the additions were, therefore, justified. 9. Mr.Swaminathan would submit that the learned CIT(A) has wrongly allowed the appeal of the assessee believing the submissions of the assessee that payments to these Sundry Trade Creditors were made later on in the year Assessment Year 2002-2003. He also submitted that if such payments were made, then, proof of the same could have been produced by the assessee before the learned Tribunal, but, nothing of this sort was done and, therefore, on account of failure of the assessee to discharge his burden of proof during the course of assessment proceedings as well as before the learn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
