9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 201X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Accordingly the same is upheld. - ITA No.6009/Del/2016 - - - Dated:- 17-10-2019 - Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member And Ms Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member For the Assessee : None For the Revenue : Ms Ashima Neb, Sr. DR ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM: The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 31st March, 2016 of the CIT(A), Meerut, relating to assessment year 2011-12. 2. This appeal was last fixed for hearing on 29th May, 2009 and at the request of the ld. counsel, the case was adjourned to 28th August, 2019. However, when the name of the assessee was called, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any petition seeking adjournment of the case was filed. Therefore, we proceed to decide the appeal on the basis of material available on record and after hearing the ld. DR. 3. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under:- 1. The L'D Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) has ,on the facts and circumstances of the case, misdirected sustenance of Addition of ₹ 9,91,425/- U/S 40(A)(3). ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessees, they deal in purchase and sale of raw buffalo meat and sold them to the assessee company. They have not maintained any books of account of this business and they are doing raw meat business at a very small level. Some suppliers also stated that they do not know the farm or related person before or after 01.04.2009. One Mrs. Mohd. Nasim Qureshi denied to have any business or otherwise with the assessee company. The amount pertaining to him was ₹ 9,91,425/- which has been shown as paid to him during the year under consideration. Since the person had denied to have any business transaction with the assessee, the Assessing Officer made addition of ₹ 9,91,425/- to the total income of the assessee. In case of the remaining suppliers, the notices were returned back unserved by the Postal Department with the report incomplete addresses , not traceable , left , etc. From the various details furnished by the assessee, the Assessing Officer noted that neither the assessee nor the suppliers have furnished satisfactory proof of documents. He, therefore, made an addition of ₹ 16,35,549/- being 10% of the payment of ₹ 1,63,5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r making addition for the balance cash purchases out of total cash purchases of ₹ 1,63,55,491/-. The facts of the case as per records and the submissions of the Ld. AR have been carefully considered in respect of addition made by the AO as well as for notice of enhancement issued by this office. It is not in dispute that all these are purchases in cash. The assessee produced few suppliers whose statements have been recorded. On examining these statements as well as the submissions of the assessee, the undisputed facts that comes out is that there is no sale bill issued by the suppliers to the assessee at the time of making the sales, it has been claimed that on supplying the material, the assessee issues a slip to the supplier for payment to be made against these supplies, the assessee makes cash payments to the supplier from time to time which is noted on the said slip maintained by the supplier, on receipt of full payment, the supplier destroys the slip. The assessee claims that it records the cash payment in his books of a/c s as and when these payments are made. However, the fact remains that neither so called slips are produced to verify ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts have been shown being started from 01.08.2010 onwards and the last payment made on 31.03.2011. The payments have been shown generally on daily basis i.e. ₹ 20,000/- on 01August, then on 2nd August, then on 3rd August and so on and so forth. Copy of this ledger a/c. is attached as Annexure - A to this order. In the ledger a/c. of Abrar Khan in the books of assessee shows opening payable as on 01.04.2010 at ₹ 7,11,880/-. No purchases have been made during this year. This outstanding has been started being paid w.e.f. 20.02.2011 till 27.03.2011 practically on each day in the denominations of ₹ 20,000/- as under:- 35 times paid @₹ 20,000/- each time ₹ 7,00,000/- 1 time paid ₹ 11,880/- ₹ 11.880/- TOTAL ₹ 7,11,880/- Copy of this ledger a/c. is attached as Annexure - B to this order. Another similar example is ledger a/c. of Mehboob Illahi Quareshi. The opg. Payable as on 01.04.2010 was ͅ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is a case where the circumstances and the material clearly shows that the entries of ₹ 20.000/- each in the books of a/c s have been made simplicitor to avoid the implication of Sec. 40 A (3) of the I.T Act. The fact of the matter is that no such petty uneducated meat supplier who generally resides in a village, will wait for so long to collect the payments against the supplies made. He would either seek payments instantly or in a very short period failing which he may not be in a position to earn his livelihood. The book entries without any supporting documents is only a makeup story to avoid the provisions of Sec. 40 A (3). The contention of the assessee that the books are audited is of no support for the assessee. The auditors in tax audit report in Form - 3 CD, in reply to Q. No. 17 (h) (B) has clearly refrained from certifying that there is no violation of provisions of Sec. 40 A (3)of the I.T Act 1961. In view of these findings, the addition of ₹ 16,35,549/- u/s. 40 A (3) is enhanced to ₹ 1,63,55,491/- thereby making an enhancement of ₹ 1,47,19,942/-. In the result this ground fails with enhancement as above. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
