9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 354X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccordingly the remaining claim of the loss in transit was added for want of any material in support of the claim. AO has not asked the assessee to furnish confirmation because of time constrain as the impugned order was passed on 30th March, 2015 just one day before the limitation, which is also mentioned by the AO in the assessment order at the bottom of Page No. 2 It is clear that the CIT(A) has not even considered the confirmation filed by the assessee while deciding this issue. Thus, it is apparent from the record that neither the AO has conducted a proper inquiry to verify the correctness of the claim due to time constrain nor the CIT(A) has considered the confirmations filed by the assessee. Accordingly, in the facts and circums ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee is directed against the order dated 1st May, 2019 of CIT(A) for the assessment year 2012-13. The assessee has raised the following grounds:- 1. Because, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A) was not justified to conform the disallowance Rs 14,265.00/- and 9,80,972.00/- total s. 9,95,237.00/- of debit note issued by the assessee in the name of Abhinav Steel Pvt. Ltd. abnd Amba Shakti Ispat Ltd. respected. 2. Because, the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A) was not justified to confirm the said addition though the appellant was already submitted the conformetry stamen of account duly signed by the parties and without consider the fact the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the said addition which is not justified in the light of juridi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of Rs. 14,265/- was added in respect of the debit notes issued of M/s. Heinz India Private Limited. Since no reply has been received from the other parties/purchasers of coal in response to the notices under Section 133(6) therefore, the AO made the additions of the amount of claim of debit notes. The AO thus made a total addition of Rs. 9,95,237/- on this account. The assessee challenged the action of the AO before the CIT(A) but could not succeed. 3. Before the Tribunal the Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that due to the shortage of time, the AO has made the addition in haste without even asking the assessee to furnish the confirmation of the debit notes issued in respect of the purchasers. He has further submitted that the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g claim of the loss in transit was added for want of any material in support of the claim. Thus, it is clear that the AO has not asked the assesssee to furnish confirmation because of time constrain as the impugned order was passed on 30th March, 2015 just one day before the limitation, which is also mentioned by the AO in the assessment order at the bottom of Page No. 2. Before the CIT(A) the assessee submitted the confirmation of the purchasers regarding the debit notes on account of loss in transit however, the CIT(A) has confirmed the addition made by the AO in Para 5 as under: 5. I have considered the submissions of the appellant and have gone through the fact of the case. The appellant has not been able to satisfactorily explain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n coal handling expenses, the assessee filed its reply and explained that the payment is made by the assessee to persons who are engaged in the coal handling against sales @Rs. 20 per MT, the assessee further explained this is a normal increase of costs due to inflation which is reasonable. The AO was not satisfied with the reply of the assessee and noted that the assessee has received coal of 1,05,721/- MT and soled coal quantity of 1,04,591/- MT during the year under consideration. Applying the rate of 20/- per MT as Coal Handling charges on the purchased quantity of 1,05,721/- MT. the AO arrived to the amount of Rs. 21,14,420/- only as against the claim of 22,84,236/-. Consequently, the AO made the addition of the differential of Rs. 1,6 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AR of the assessee, there is a difference in the gross amount of coal purchased by the assessee and coal handling charges are claimed to have been paid on the gross amount and not on the net amount. The AO computed the coal handling charges on the net quantity. However, this point was not raised by the assessee either before the AO or before the CIT(A). Therefore, these facts of gross amount and net amount of coal purchase during the year under consideration were unverified at the level of AO as well as CIT(A). 11. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case, this issue is set aside to the record of the AO for reconsideration the same after giving an appropriate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 12. In the result, ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
