9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 340X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t received, therefore, there was no question of making the payment had not been considered in right perspective - not clear as to whether the assessee furnished the reconciliation statement either before the A.O. or before the Ld. CIT(A) and explained satisfactorily the difference in the purchase found entered in the books of account and as mentioned in the CBEC Export Import Summary tab. We deem it appropriate to set aside this issue back to the file of the A.O. to be adjudicated afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. - ITA No. 1520/Chd/2019 - - - Dated:- 6-4-2021 - N.K. Saini, Vice President And R.L. Neg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of imports shown in the export import data. During the course of assessment proceedings the A.O. observed that the assessee had shown purchases of ₹ 28,56,224/- from outside India, in its books of accounts and as per the information gathered from CBEC Export-Import Summary tab on ITBA, the assessee had made purchases of ₹ 70,79,889/- from China. The A.O. asked the assessee to explain the above discrepancy, however no reply was received. He therefore treated the difference of ₹ 42,23,659/- on account of purchases made from outside India out of its unexplained/undisclosed source of income, as taxable income of the assessee. The A.O. also observed that the assessee had shown custom duty of ₹ 22,50,000/- in its books o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etters, furnished by the assessee had date inscribed on it whereas another letter from the Exporter having the same content was undated, and that the assessee had not submitted any proof of return of goods to the agents of the Exporter. The A.O. also stated that goods worth ₹ 70,79,889/- could not have been dispatched without receiving any payment. 4.2. In his rebuttal the assessee submitted to the Ld. CIT(A) as under: As already submitted, the earlier notices issued by the AO stood duly complied. The issue on merit is still pending for decision and the ITO has not been able to challenge the same. It may incidentally be mentioned that the AO has not supplied any details of the value of import taken by him at ₹ 70,79,883/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee reiterated the submissions made before the authorities below and further submitted that neither the A.O. nor the Ld. CIT(A) appreciated the facts in right perspective, even after the admission of the additional evidence, by the Ld. CIT(A). He requested to set aside the issue to the file of the A.O. so that the proper reconciliation and explanation may be furnished to him by the assessee. 7. The Ld. Sr. DR although supported the orders of the authorities below, however could not controvert the aforesaid contention of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. 8. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on the record. In the present case, it appears that the additional evidence furnished by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
