9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 173X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the list with PAN number of the sundry creditors who were having balances more than five lakh. The liabilities shown in shape of sundry creditors are not genuine - CIT(A) deleted addition - HELD THAT:- The assessee has provided the list of creditors during the assessment proceedings but the AO had made no effort to verify the genuineness of these creditors. A remand report was called out by the Ld CIT(A) but the AO had not disclosed the mistake in the details of creditors submitted by the assessee. The AO had the opportunity to verify the PAN numbers when the remand report was called out by the CIT(A) but without verifying the details the reply was submitted by the AO. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition made by AO. Addition for increase in GP - DR has submitted that the assessee has not produced the proper books of accounts along with stock register and assessee has not proved the genuineness of the fall in Gross profit rate in spite of the fact that quantum of sales has increased for the year under consideration - CIT(A) deleted addition - HELD THAT:- From the perusal of order of the CIT(A) it is evident that books of accounts were rejected by AO without any cogent reason. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ddition made on account of increase in GP of Rs. 17,84,29,863/-, unexplained creditors of Rs. 5,00,00,000/- and disallowance of credit card commission and credit risk insurance expenses of Rs. 1,59,17,692/- in the hands of assessee company by ignoring the facts and merits of the case. ii. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is correct in deleting the addition of Rs. 5,00,00,000/- by not appreciating the fact that the assessee has willfully did not provide the complete details during assessment proceedings and prevented the A.O. from concluding independent enquiry by furnishing incomplete information at the fag end of time barring. iii. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is correct in deleting the addition of Rs. 17,84,29,863/- ignoring the fact that despite substantial increase in sales that is from Rs. 1103 crore to Rs. 1621, no substantial increase in GP was shown by the assessee. iv Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is correct in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,59,17,692/- on account of credit card and commission and credit card risk insurance paid igno ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issued on 29.09.2015 which was duly served through speed post on 06.10.2015 but again no compliance was made on the fixed date of 13.10.2015. Fresh notice u/s 142(1) was once again issued on 15.10.2015 and sent through speed post which was duly served on 19.10.2015 but again on the fixed date of 23.10.2015 no compliance has been made. In view of above, please show cause as to why ex-party assessment on the basis of material available on record be not made in the case of the company. If you have any objection, an explanation in this regard may be filed before the undersigned on 01.12.2015 at 11:00 am when these proceeding are finally fixed. You may also file any Information as asked vide notice u/s 142(1) dated 31.07.2015 and order sheet dated 26.08.2015 on that day which will also be considered before making any such order. In any case, this may be treated as final opportunity (N.K. Bansal) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 12(2), New Delhi 5. The AO by order dated 31-03-2016 has made the total addition of Rs 24,43,47,555/- on account of gross profit 4% at Rs 178429863/-, unexplained creditors at Rs 50000000/-and disallowance of credit cards Commission and Credit Risk Insuran ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he documents called for. Thus, it was claimed by the appellant that the assessee had attended the assessment proceedings on regular basis and filed the replies and documents from time to time, however, assessee was unable to submit certain documents during the course of assessment proceedings as these documents were either not called for specifically during the course of assessment or sufficient time was not allowed. The appellant also submitted that upon perusal of dates of hearing, will also appreciate that there was no intention of the assessee to ignore the assessment proceedings, in fact, It has made its best efforts to submit all the documents during the course of assessment proceedings, however, due to certain circumstances beyond the control of the assessee, it could not submit certain documents during the assessment proceedings. Accordingly, it is requested before you that assessee was prevented by sufficient cause to submit these documents during the assessment proceedings and hence these documents should be accepted as these documents meets the root cause of allegations of the Id. Assessing officer. The appellant also relies upon the following judgments: Kvaerner Boving ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gister. He has further submitted that assessee has not proved the genuineness of the fall in Gross profit rate in spite of the fact that quantum of sales has increased for the year under consideration. The AO has rejected the books of account alleging that he was not satisfied with the correctness of books of accounts. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that merely because the profit had declined the AO cannot reject the books of accounts. He has submitted the comparative chart of the financial performance of the assessee over a period of 3 years as under:- Particulars /AY AY 2010-11 AY 2011-12 AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 Sales 8,65,09,97,553 8,11,34,858 11,03,93,33,341 16,21,17,86,542 Purchases 8,41,15,18,790 7,83,84,00,244 10,60,35,70,022 15,74,17,44,943 Gross Profit (GP) 23,94,78,763 27,50,31,614 43,57,63,319 47,00,41,599 GP as a percentage of Sales 2.77% 3.39% 3.95% 2.90% Net Profit Before tax (NP) 10,02,31,013 9,41,16,435 10,43,52,226 14,57,79,311 12. The reliance has placed on the following judicial decisions :- 1. The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -9 Vs IBILT Technologies Ltd. 2018 (10) TMI 63 Delhi High Court dated 12.09.2018 2. CIT Vs. Winner Constructions Pvt. Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
