Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2022 (11) TMI 1167

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... peal has taken the following grounds of appeal: "1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to take cognizance of the Remand Report submitted by the A.O. where it has been clearly recorded that out of the total 31 parties of cash purchase the assessee failed to provide the address of 13 parties and could produce ledger Copy of only 21 parties but no supporting documents by way of bills/vouchers over 14 hearings and without appreciating these facts on record, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition of cash purchases by accepting fresh evidence in contravention to Rule 46A of the 1.T. Rules, 1962. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the powers of the ld. CIT(A) are co-terminus with .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... commission out of the above transaction. The Assessing Officer held that the assessee had violated the provision of section 40A(3) of the Act by making the aforesaid cash purchases amounting to Rs.7,20,27,038/-. Therefore, the Assessing Officer invoking the provisions to section 40A(3) of the Act, added back the said amount to the total income of the assessee. 3. Being aggrieved from the above order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A). Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee explained its business architecture by explaining that the assessee is a 'single sim multi-recharge platform provider' which means that the assessee provides a platform to numerous individual retailers who from one single sim can simul .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he assessee has made bulk purchases of talk-time of Rs.79,07,60,072/-, wherein, all payments were paid by cheque and by bank transfer mode. However, only remaining amount of Rs.7,20,27,038/- which was the value of talk-time that has been purchased in cash from various other small distributors and retailers and as and when the need for such talk-time stock arose. That the aforesaid cash purchases have been made in enumerable number of transactions on different dates and where not a single payment has exceeded the threshold limit of Rs.20,000/-. The cash book, purchase register and all individual invoices have been produced before the CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A), after considering the above submission and documents, deleted the disallowance made b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er day and getting return thereby on it as recharge commission in form of talk time value. Now by subscribing to a single SIM multi recharge platform which is provided by the assessee, he does not have to deploy more funds for pore wallets but far less fund in a single wallet with the assessee company.3ince, less amount of fund is now kept deployed and the business of recharge of mobile and D2H services become less hassle free for the individual retailers, they have no hesitation in settling for a lower value of commission amount in the form of talk time stock which they now get from the assessee company. This in fact means that the assessee buys back not only the LAPU SIMs from the numerous individual retailer, it also buys out their talk .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . The ld. CIT(A) has categorically mentioned that the cash book, purchase register and all individual invoices where cash transaction had taken place have been thoroughly checked and it is found that not a single such transaction actually exceeded the threshold limit of Rs.20,000/-. In view of the aforesaid factual finding given by the CIT(A) after thoroughly checking the record and account of the assessee that not a single transaction actually exceeded the threshold limit of Rs.20,000/- and that there is no violation of the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) and the same is upheld. 5. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed. Kolkata, the 21st N .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates