9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 340X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oprietary concern which are authorized traders of Pan Masala Zarda and accordingly filed return of income - A.R submitted that during demonetization period from 09.11.2016 to 31.12.2016 assessee deposited demonetized currencies in the case of two concerns - The Ld. A.R stated that the assessee is a CSA (Consignee Sales Agent) of the DS group Delhi who is in the business of pan masala, jarda, supari for the state of Bihar. We note that the money received by the assessee in the proprietary concern was immediately transferred to D.S. group on which the assessee received commission. The AO, after analyzing all these facts in details, accepted the explanation of the assessee and made no addition while framing the assessment. A.R therefore submitted that the AO has taken a plausible and possible view on the basis of evidences/explanation furnished by the assessee after doing necessary verification and examination of the same. According to the Pr. CIT AO has not verified the details furnished by the assessee qua the spike in the sales of the assessee during various months particularly during demonetization - cash deposited by the assessee in the bank account was abnormally high an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... records observed that there was abnormal increase in cash deposits into the bank account of the assessee during the year especially during the demonetization period. The Ld. Pr. CIT observed that there was no cash sales from April to July, 2016 however in August the cash sales were only 5.00 lacs which rose to Rs. 11.00 lacs in September and fell back to Rs. 1.60 lakhs in October. However in November, sales were more than Rs. 7.00 crores and in December the cash sales have been shown at Rs. 3.00 crores which fell back to Rs. 5.00 lakhs in January, 2017. According to the Pr. CIT the AO did not make any verification/enquiry regarding the cash sales during demonetization period with corresponding purchases/ stocks and evidences of receipt of actual stocks by not verifying the stock register. According to Pr. CIT, since the AO has failed to make necessary verification, the order passed by the AO u/s 143(3) dated 24.12.2019 was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Accordingly a notice u/s 263 of the Act was issued on 22.03.2022 which was replied by the assessee electronically. The assessee replied and submitted before the Pr. CIT the reasons for abnormal sales durin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0,00,000/- and assessee deposited in its bank accounts cash aggregating to Rs. 2,28,94,660/-. The Ld. A.R stated that the assessee is a CSA (Consignee Sales Agent) of the DS group Delhi who is in the business of pan masala, jarda, supari for the state of Bihar. The Ld. A.R stated that the money received by the assessee in the proprietary concern was immediately transferred to D.S. group on which the assessee received commission. The Ld. A.R submitted that the bank statements corroborating the deposits and transfers to the main account. The AO after analyzing all the fact in great depth and details accepted the explanation of the assessee and made no addition while framing the assessee. The Ld. A.R therefore submitted that the AO has taken a plausible and possible view on the basis of evidences/explanation furnished by the assessee r after doing necessary verification and examination of the same. The Ld. A.R submitted that where the Pr. CIT was of the view that the AO has not conducted proper enquiry then the Pr. CIT is under obligation to conduct an enquiry and come to a definitive conclusion as to how the assessment framed is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e authorized traders of Pan Masala Zarda and accordingly filed return of income of Rs. 4,46,70,490/-. The Ld. A.R submitted that during demonetization period from 09.11.2016 to 31.12.2016 assessee deposited demonetized currencies in the case of Aariket Traders of Rs. 5,63,50,000/- and in the case of Ariket Enterprises of Rs. 3,50,00,000/- and assessee deposited in her bank accounts cash aggregating to Rs. 2,28,94,660/-. The Ld. A.R stated that the assessee is a CSA (Consignee Sales Agent) of the DS group Delhi who is in the business of pan masala, jarda, supari for the state of Bihar. We note that the money received by the assessee in the proprietary concern was immediately transferred to D.S. group on which the assessee received commission. The AO, after analyzing all these facts in details, accepted the explanation of the assessee and made no addition while framing the assessment. The Ld. A.R therefore submitted that the AO has taken a plausible and possible view on the basis of evidences/explanation furnished by the assessee after doing necessary verification and examination of the same. According to the Pr. CIT , the AO has not verified the details furnished by the assessee q ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
