9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 658X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... natural justice to administrative proceedings. The rules of natural justice are rooted in all legal systems and are not any new theology. They are manifested in the twin principles of nemo judex in partesua (no person shall be a judge in his own case) and audialterem partem (the right to be heard). It has been pointed out that the aim of natural justice is to secure justice. In respect of the following parties Viz: M/s Shri Ganesh Fashion, M/s Maruti Nandan Textile, M/s Payal Fashion, M/s Radha Swami Creation, and M/s Deep Creation, the payments were made through banking channel and respective bills of job charges are on the record and assessee also submitted contra accounts, which were not properly considered by ld CIT(A). In respect of M/s Jahanvi Fashion, we note that assessee submitted additional evidences. Therefore, we are of the view that the matter should be remitted back to the file of the ld CIT(A) in respect of above noted six parties only, to examine the evidences and adjudicate the issue in accordance with law. We are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the ld CIT(A) in respect of above noted six parties. The a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,26,310 3 Satyam Creation 17,01,850 4 Om Art 24,80,333 5 Vraj Fashion 23,07,280 6 Deep Creation 4,49,045 7 Angel Fabrics 10,12,523 8 Darshan Fashion 1,77,180 9 Shree Ganesh Fashion 7,74,870 10 Maruti Nandan Textile 8,44,988 11 Jahanvi Fashion 37,24,291 12 Brahmani Creation 12,61,495 13 Guru Krupa Fashion 9,03,560 14 Payal Fashion 7,58,290 15 Rasha Swami Creation 1,52,840 Total 1,76,73,760 4.The assessee also failed to furnish necessary documents in support of purchase and sales, therefore a final show cause notice dated 15.03.2014 was issued to the assessee to furnish the explanation alongwith complete documents in support of contention of assessee. The said show cause notice issued by Assessing Officer is reproduced as below:- "You are well aware that time barring scrutiny assessment proceedings under section 143(3) of the I.T. Act 1961 for the A.Y. 2010-11 are going on in your case. In response to this notice on various date your authorized representative filed submission. After perusal the submissions, notice have been issued to various persons for verification of genuineness of transaction and dispatched thr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... returned unserved. In this connection, 1. We have furnished the addresses as they appeared in our records which were furnished to us; 2. On inquiry, we have learnt that some parties have closed their business and moved out the premises where they were carrying on the business; 3. Some parties have moved out of Surat; 4. Two parties have been reported dead; In view of the above, to prove the genuineness of our transactions with the said parties, we are enclosing herewith: * Ledger a/c. copy of each party with whom we had the transactions; * Form No.l6A of each party issued by us quarter-wise indicating the amount of transaction, TDS deducted, PAN/TAN no. of the Deductor, PAN No. and the address of the Deductee, assessment year for which the TDS pertained, sec. under which TDS was deducted, date of payment; * BSR code of the bank branch and the date of deposit etc. Sir you would kindly appreciate that we have discharged our onus to a large extent to prove the bona fides and the genuineness of transactions. Besides, as all the parties are the assessees of Surat, with the help of their PA no. you can test check their returns. As to other requirements listed therei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the AO and the principles of natural justice, the additional evidences under Rule 46A of the IT Rules is being admitted and the ground of appeal is adjudicated accordingly. 6.1.7. The details on the record show that the appellant had claimed job work expenses which was investigated by the AO and it was found that the 15 parties to whom the payment of ₹ 1,76,73,760/- has been made were found to be nonexistent at the given address. The appellant inresponse to the show cause notice was able to furnish the confirmations, bank statement, return of income, etc. from 3 parties namely Kudrat Creation, Om Art and Vraj Fashion which was considered as explained and therefore the AO made the addition in respect of 12 parties amounting to ₹ 1,11,84,297/-. The AO rejected the books of account u/s 145(2) of the Act as the appellant had failed to establish the genuineness of the job Work expenses. The appellant was given opportunity during the assessment proceedings to produce the parties for verification which the appellant failed. The issue of rejection of books of accounts on the basis of the appellants' failure regarding the genuineness of the expenses has been examined and found ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eque on which TDS has been deducted. On the perusal of the details it is observed that the party has filed the confirmation alongwith the address and PAN. In the remand report the AO could not point out any discrepancy except that no other documents, such as bank statements, ITR, etc. had not been filed. The AO had the full opportunity to examine the party during the remand report proceedings, in case he had doubts regarding the confirmation. The confirmation filed by the party is considered to be satisfactory and the addition to the extent of ₹ 4,98,905/- is deleted. 2. Satyam Creation: The AO reported that the party has filed the confirmation alongwith the PAN, ITR acknowledgment, copy of computation of income and balance sheet but the amount of job charges shown in the appellant's ledger is ₹ 17,01,850/- but in the confirmation filed the amount shown is ₹ 9,03,639/- only, on the balance carry forward and on the credit side amount shown is ₹ 8,89,663/-. The appellant submitted that the difference in the closing balance to the extent of ₹ 13,976(9,03,639/- - 8,89,663/-) is due to fact that the appellant had passed the discount-entry amounting to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9,030/- only on the balance carry forward and the credit side shown ₹ 4,32,963/-. The appellant submitted that there is no difference in the ledger account of the appellant and the contra confirmation filed by the Angel Fabrics. On the perusal of the details the contention of the appellant was found to be correct and the confirmation filed is matches with the ledger account of the appellant and therefore the addition of ₹ 10,12,523/- is deleted. 5. Darshan Fashion: The AO reported that the party has filed the PAN details, ITR acknowledgment, copy of computation of income and balance sheet, has been filed. The amount of job charges shown in the appellant's ledger is ₹ 1,77,180/- and the balance carry forward arid the credit side shown ₹ 1,05,712/- but in the balance sheet of Darshan Fashion, the amount shown against the name of the appellant as sundry debtors is of ₹ 1,06,323/- and there is a difference amount of ₹ 611/-. The appellant submitted that there is small difference of ₹ 611 only and adverse inference should be drawn in the ledger account of the appellant and the contra confirmation filed by the Darshan Fabrics. On the perusa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he AO reported that the party has filed the confirmation with PAN, without ITR acknowledgment, copy of balance sheet, etc. The amount of job charges shown in the appellant's ledger is ₹ 9,03,560/- and in the confirmation filed shows the balance brought down as per the appellant's books of ₹ 1,22,018/- matches with the figure of the sundry debtors in the balance sheet of Guru Krupa Fashion. The appellant submitted that there is no difference in the ledger account of the appellant and the contra confirmation filed by the GuruKrupa Fashion. On the perusal of the details the contention of the appellant was found to be correct and the confirmation filed is matches with the ledger account of the appellant and therefore the addition of ₹ 9,03,560/- is deleted. 6.1.10. In view of the above facts, the addition made by the AO in- the case of the following parties is upheld/deleted as per the chart below: Sr. No. Name of the party Amount Decision 1 M/s Shree Ganesh Fashion ₹ 7,74,8701- Dismissed 2 M/s Maruti Nandan Textile ₹ 8,44,988/- Dismissed 3 M/s Payal Fashion ₹ 7,58,290/- Dismissed 4 M/s Radha Swami Creation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... below: "May it please to your honur 1.The assessee has filed an appeal before Honourable ITAT for A.Y 2011-12 against the order of ld. CIT(A). The assessee hereby makes an application under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 & hereby prays for admission of documents enclosed herewith. 2. It is prayed that the documents enclosed with this application may kindly be admitted as the same is very much necessary to do substantial justice in the matter & are very much vital for proper adjudication of the issue involved in instant appeal. Assessee was unable to file these evidences before lower authorities due to reasons beyond his control. Assessee made his best possible efforts to obtain the I.T acknowledgement & other details of M/s Jahanvi Fashions (proprietory concern of Mahesh G Dakhara) but due to non-cooperative attitude of the party, assessee could not submit the same before lower authorities. Assessee managed to convince the party only recently for supplying the requisite details & hence, these evidences are filed for first time before Honourable ITAT. There is absolutely no intention on assessee's part in not filing these evidence before assessing office or CIT(A). 3. In l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
