9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 1029X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orementioned party i.e. M/s. DPSIPL would have advanced the amount in two installments, i.e, more than two months before receiving the first bag of cement from the assessee, we are of the considered view, that by so observing the CIT(A) had tried to convey that the liability in question in itself was bogus. If that be so, then, we are of the considered view that no addition qua the outstanding liability in question could have been made in the hands of the assessee during the year under consideration - See USHA STUD AGRICULTURAL FARM LTD. [ 2008 (3) TMI 91 - DELHI HIGH COURT] There was no justification on the part of the A.O in making the impugned addition u/s.68 of the Act during the year. Backed by our aforesaid observation, we find no justifiable reason to uphold the view taken by the CIT (Appeals) as regards the impugned addition. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 277/RPR/2016 And ITA No. 78/RPR/2015 - - - Dated:- 21-2-2022 - Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member And Shri Jamlappa D Battull, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri S.R Rao, A.R For the Revenue : Shri G.N Singh, D.R ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, JM: The captioned appeals filed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imed by the assessee that the aforementioned party had given an advance for purchase of cement from the assessee concern. In so far the complete address of the aforesaid party was concerned, it was submitted by the assessee that it was not conversant with its present whereabouts. However, the Assessing Officer was not persuaded to subscribe to the aforesaid explanation of the assessee. It was observed by the Assessing Officer that it was beyond comprehension that the assessee would have though received a substantial amount of advance from the aforementioned party but would be ignorant about its whereabouts. Backed by his aforesaid observations, the Assessing Officer was of the view that the outstanding liability of the assessee qua the aforementioned party was bogus. It was observed by him that the aforementioned amount that was received by the assessee as an advance from the aforementioned party would have thereafter crystallized into supply of goods to it by the assessee. Observing, that the assessee had neither accounted for the purchase bills corresponding to the aforesaid unaccounted sales made to the aforesaid party nor furnished the complete details of its transactions with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... year. On a perusal of the orders of the lower authorities, we find that the reasons adopted by them to make/sustain the addition of ₹ 1,50,080/-(supra) are based on observations standing on their respective independent footing. On the one hand, we find that the Assessing Officer had doubted the aforesaid outstanding liability, for the reason, that as per him goods would have been supplied by the assessee against the same. Being of the view that the assessee would have carried out unaccounted purchases of goods which thereafter would had been routed as unaccounted sales to the aforementioned party, the A.O held a conviction that the liability in question was to be dubbed as bogus and thus, was not to be accepted. In the backdrop of his aforesaid observations, the Assessing Officer was of the view that the outstanding liability in question that was reflected by the assessee in his books of account was nothing but his undisclosed business income which was reflected in the garb of the aforesaid outstanding liability. On the other hand, we find that the CIT (Appeals) had though upheld the addition as regards the outstanding liability in question, but the reasoning adopted by him s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gricultural Farms Ltd. (2008) 301 ITR 384 (Del), wherein it was observed as under : 6. Section 68 of the Act reads as under: 68. Cash credits Where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessed maintained for any previous year, and the assessed offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory, the sum so credited may be charged to income-tax as the income of the assessed of that previous year. 7. According to this Section, any sum found credited in the books of the assessed maintained for a previous year may be charged to income tax as the income of the assessed of that previous year, if - (i) The assessed offers no explanation about the nature of sources of such sum, or (ii) The explanation offered by him is, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, not satisfactory. 8. Here, the CIT(A) has deleted the addition of ₹ 15 lacs mainly on the ground that this credit balance of ₹ 15 lacs is being reflected in the accounts of the assessed over the past four to five years or so and hence this was not a fresh credit entry of the previous year unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
