9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 623X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the assessee s books. Rather this case has been made out that the suppliers did not maintain books of account and same could not be traced. We also rely upon the ITAT order in assessee s own case for AY 2007-08 referred above. Suppliers are small type of butchers living in various locations and are illiterate as noted by the Tribunal. Instead of money receipts, assessee was using slip system, which in such areas is not uncommon. The recipients of such type of slips do not preserve such slips and this is not uncommon phenomenon. In our considered opinion, the disallowance made u/s 40A(3) is not reasonable and hence, we set-aside the orders of the authorities below and deleted the addition. Appeal of the assessee stands allowed. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itors. After examining the creditor s response, the Assessing Officer was of the opinion that 20%of the total cash credit of Rs.2,18,28,275/- needs to be disallowed. However, the assessee submitted that all creditors are genuine. Considering the response of all the creditors and reply of the assessee, the Assessing Officer disallowed 20% of the cash credit appearing in the balance sheet. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer examined the purchase of raw material. On this issue, the Assessing Officer noted that as against total purchases of Rs.2,66,64,300/-, perusal of details of payment, it is seen that the assessee paid only Rs.48,35,025/- against the purchases made during the year. The Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 133(6) of the Act to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,63,55,491/- in cash is not violation of provision of section 40A(3) of the Act. Accordingly, he enhanced the same by remaining Rs.1,47,19,942/-. 7. Against the above order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 8. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee pleaded that the disallowance is being made on the ground that the payments are being made in cash and higher than Rs.20,000/-. They are entered in the books Rs.20,000/- per transaction. He submitted that the assessee s books have not been faulted and the same have not been rejected. If the suppliers did not maintain books of account, the assessee could not be faulted for that and disallowance cannot be made in the hands of the assessee. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reditors appearing in accounts. Many creditors in current year were also creditors in earlier years also. Thus, we find that the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has made a reasonable order which does not need any interference on our part. Accordingly, we uphold the same. 9. The ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that in that case addition was made u/s 41(1) but the Tribunal found that it was not up to the mark and deleted the addition. For the present time, the addition has been made by holding that payment are made in violation of section 40A(3) of the Act without any defect pointed out in assessee s books of accounts. 10. Per Contra, the Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 11. Upon careful cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
