9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 1056X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... For the Revenue : Sh. Kanav Bali, Sr. DR ORDER PER DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of ld. CIT(A)-17, New Delhi dated 03.06.2016. 2. Following grounds have been raised by the Revenue: (1) The Ld CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 4,95,25,264/- on account of bogus sundry creditors. The Ld CIT(A) has erred in not considering the facts that in absence of any tangible evidence of the creditors, it is very difficult to accept that the goods were in fact purchased on credit. Reliance can be placed in this regard in the case of ITO vs ZAZSONS Exports Ltd. (LKO). (2) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the various facts of the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tify the purchase price of the raw meat in absence of the any proper bills of the creditors. 3. The assessee is a firm and engaged in the business of trading and manufacturing of raw and frozen buffalo meat. The assessee declared its income from business and profession. The assessee filed return of income on 01.10.2012 declaring an income of Rs.29,79,360/-. Disallowance of Bogus Sundry Creditors: 4. The facts of the case are that the assessee has shown sundry creditors towards purchase of raw meat of Rs.4,95,25,264/- as on 31.03.2012. 5. The AO asked the assessee to submit evidence/proof of the raw meat purchased, transportation bills, ledger account of purchase and of creditors alongwith list of sundry creditors etc. Furt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... verified. The AO held that the appellant could not furnish address, PAN and other- documentary evidence of the creditors and could not produce any of the creditors. The AO held that the books of account were neither complete nor reliable since no stock register, goods inward register, goods outward register is being maintained by the appellant on regular basis as the appellant could not produce a single purchase order placed before the parties from whom meat was purchased, which would have contained any details as to quantity of meat, type of meat and rates paid to them. During the year relevant to the A.Y. 201213, the assessee had purchased raw-meat amounting to Rs.112.67 Crores from the sundry meat suppliers then processed the raw-meat a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 69C. Accordingly substantial question of law No.3 is being answered in favour of the revenue. 8. We are in agreement with the submission of the ld. DR on the issue of addition of sundry creditors u/s 68/69C. In the instant case, we are dealing with whether the sundry creditors or infact genuine or bogus. 9. We have gone through the reasons given by the ld. CIT(A) while deleting the addition viz. The assessee has purchased raw meat of worth Rs.112.67 Cr. from the meat supplier which has been sold for Rs.120.96 Cr. and the net gain has been duly disclosed. The payment to raw-meat suppliers have been made duly complying with the provisions of sec 40A(3) read with rule 6DD(e)(ii). During the course of the assessment procee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
