9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 338X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... venue authorities. Assessing Officer keeps on making the reference of Bank account, partial payments, etc. If he has any doubt, he should ask Tata Metaliks DI Pipes Limited. In that exercise, lot of unnecessary litigation as well as wastage of resources could be avoided. Similar is the situation with regard to other small issues by making reference of irrelevant things the disallowance has been made. The simple way for AO was to cross verify from the concerned party, without adopting that course, he keeps on drawing inference of defects in the details of assessee by way of a deductive reasoning method. On due consideration of the details, we are of the view that the disallowance is not sustainable. We allow the appeal of the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 8,79,718/- 2. 194J HEG Ltd. Rs. 55,150/- 3. 194C Public Health Engg. Division Rs. 2,10,504/- 3. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT (Appeals), filed written submissions and explained its stand. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) called for a remand report and thereafter upheld the additions by recording the following finding:- In this ground of appeal the appellant has disputed the addition of Rs. 11,45,372/- made by the AO holding the same to be the income received by the assessee based on the information collected fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... although the assessee has claimed TDS of Rs. 5515/-, but the assessee failed to offer Rs. 55150/- in its return of income. With respect to its claim towards Public Health Engg. Division, the assessee failed to submit any supporting documents before the AO. The Remand Report of the AO was provided to the appellant for its comments, to which the appellant has not been able to establish whether the purported receipts (as tabulated above) has been included in its total income and neither has the appellant been able to clarify the contentions of the AO by producing the corresponding documentary evidences. The A/R of the appellant was unable to provide any satisfactory explanation and the said ground has not been pressed any further. Theref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the consideration those amounts as its income since it did not receive any amount from them. Therefore, the assessee did not make any default in computing its total income and the addition made by the AO is unjustified and needs to be deleted. For the sake of your honors convenience the transactions with such parties are briefly discussed hereunder; With regard to transactions with M/s. Tata Metaliks PI Pipes Limited. With respect to the transactions made with M/s. Tata Metaliks DI Pipes Limited, we would like to bring into your kind attention that the said transaction is related to the purchase of scrap from M/s. Tata Metaliks DI Pipes Limited and for the same the said party has collected tax at source from the assessee u/s. 206C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ge No. 1 of Paper Book) is slightly differing with the amount shown as per 26AS because of adjustments in the bill value which is quite natural in theses type of transactions. Therefore, we can see that the transaction with Tata Metaliks DI Pipes Ltd. being in nature of purchase, cannot be treated to be the income of the assessee. As per the provisions of TCS the seller is required to collect tax at source from the buyer which the impugned party has done and accordingly the amount was reflected in Sl. No. 3 of Part B of 26AS of the assessee which the Ld. AO has by mistakenly treated as income of the assessee. The addition is purely of mis-conceptional nature. Hence, the addition made by the Ld. AO of Rs. 8,79,718/- is unjustified and needs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... addition in income of an assessee cannot be made just by relying on the 26AS available. It is unjustified as any addition just based on the 26AS can be vague and the same can appear because of any mistake committed by someone else . 5. During the course of hearing, we have gone through these details with the assistance of Ld. representative. We have also gone through the remand report dated 26.10.2021, whose copy has been placed on record by the assessee. A perusal of the finding of the Ld. 1st Appellate Authority would reveal that the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has failed to appreciate the nature of transactions. The assessee has pointed out that it has made advance payment of Rs. 9,39,708/- to Tata Metaliks DI Pipes Limited for purchase of sc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
