9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (6) TMI 151X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... creditors of Rs. 12,15,959/-. 3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of notice issued nor there in any application for adjournment. Therefore, we decided to proceed exparte. 4. Having heard the ld. DR, who placed strong reliance on the order of the ld. CIT(A), we have carefully perused the orders of the authorities below. 5. Facts on record show that during the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 133(6) of the Income tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'The Act' for short] to sundry creditors. We find that the assessee could not provide suitable explanation with respect to differences in the cases of 15 parties. The Assessing Officer, accordingly, disallowed Rs. 12 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice letter dated 09.09.2016 and Assessing Officer has issued the notices u/s 133(6) on 23.09.2016 and she has submitted her reply on 18.11.2016. Therefore, there was almost time of two months during which no further compliance was made by concerned parties. Appellant in his reply has only made only hypothetical claim. If that was the case and he was sure, he could have obtained the copies of replies submitted by the sundry debtors and creditors and enclosed alongwith his reply in rejoinder to the remand report. Therefore, there is no basis in the claim of Appellant. 10.18 With respect to disallowance on account of sundry creditors, Assessing Officer has stated that in the case of M/s Sony Knit Fab, outstanding amount as on 31.03.2012 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issued notice u/s 133(6) to confirm the outstanding amount and submit the copy of debit note. However, M/s Fashion Next has not submitted any copy of debit note. Assessing Officer has also stated that there is no posting of debit note in their ledger account. Therefore, it is clear that as against the amount of Rs. 14,60,365/-, the outstanding amount as per the ledger account of Appellant in the books of M/s Fashion Next was Rs. 13,64,788/-. Similarly, in the case of M/s Goddess Exports Pvt. Ltd., there is debit balance of Rs. 6,15,466/- in the books of M/s Goddess Exports Pvt. Ltd. as against Rs. 5,15,466/- declared by the Appellant. Assessing Officer has further stated that M/s Creations was issued notice u/s 133(6) to submit the copy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Rs. 729/- was issued on 23.03.2012 and cheque of Rs. 53,028/- was issued on 31.03.2012.1 have examined the claim of Appellant and it is clear that debit note of Rs. 729/- and cheque of Rs. 53,028/- was issued and, therefore, difference in the case of M/s Aman Exports is reconciled. As a result, disallowance in the case of M/s Aman Exports (Rs. 53,757/-), M/s Leela Niryat (Rs. 14,0^8/-) and M/s Jung Garments (Rs. 1,23,820/-) is reconciled and, therefore, disallowance of Rs. 1,91,615/- is deleted. In the case of M/s Fashion Next, M/s Goddess Export Pvt. Ltd., M/s Creations, M/s Tradition & Modernity, the difference has not been reconciled. Further, in the case of M/s Alka Creations, M/s Design & Design and M/s Overseas, no reply has been re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
