9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 242X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s from their bank accounts and that such purchases are reflected in their Trading and Profit and Loss Accounts. AO if so considers fit, may, ask the assessee to furnish the required details, which according to assessee are voluminous, before the verification unit and call for a report from the verification unit. Assessing Officer shall decide the issue as per fact and law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the Assessing Officer on the appointed date and file the requisite details without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the Assessing Officer is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. - Shri R. K. Panda, Vice President And Ms. Astha Chandra, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Sanket M Joshi For the Department : Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR ORDER PER R. K. PANDA, VP : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.05.2024 of the CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2018-19. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... only. Since there was difference of Rs. 40,14,65,505/- in the value of purchases claimed by the assessee in the ITR and that reported in 26AS, therefore, the Assessing Officer, in order to verify the genuineness of transactions, issued notice u/s 133(6) of the Act to one M/s. Rayoman Wines, one of the major suppliers of the assessee. However, there was no response from the said party. The Assessing Officer thereafter asked the assessee to reconcile the difference in purchases claimed in the ITR and that submitted in its computation and reported in 26AS. The Assessing Officer also asked the assessee to explain as to why the provisions of section 69C of the Act should not be attracted to the difference in value of purchases to the tune of Rs. 40,14,65,505/-. 6. In response to the above, the assessee submitted a chart containing the purchase amount booked in the name of the sister concerns. However, there were no complete details filed by the assessee before the Assessing Officer such as purchase ledger of each of the sister concerns and confirmations from the suppliers regarding the mistake that occurred in punching wrong PAN while booking the sales in the names of sister concerns. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s but purchase in fact has been made by and booked in the books of accounts of sister concern firms, it is a mere case of typographical mistake from the end of suppliers while mentioning the PAN on their invoice. 6.1 The submission of the appellant is examined. And is not found to be acceptable for the simple reasons that the purchases were made by the assessee on which the TCS had been collected as per the applicable rate. The argument that the purchases were made by the assessee and TCS collected in its name but the actual purchases were made by different sister concern is devoid of facts. The appellant had failed to establish this theory before the AO and has also not provided any cogent reason with supporting documents to consider the proposition of the appellant. Accordingly, the action of the AO is upheld. The grounds of appeal are dismissed. 9. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: 1] The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 40,14,65,505 made by the A.O. u/s 69C towards alleged unexplained purchases merely on the basis of wrong reporting of TCS on PAN No. of appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n case for the preceding two years, copies of which are placed at pages 131 to 133 and 139 to 140 of the paper book, he submitted that the identical claim of the assessee was accepted by the department and no addition has been made. Referring to the copies of assessment orders passed u/s 143(3) of the Act in the case of M/s. Pratik Wines for assessment year 2016-17 and 2017-18, copies of which are placed at pages 143 to 148 of the paper book, he submitted that the Assessing Officer in the orders passed u/s 143(3) of the Act in the case of sister concerns has accepted the contention of the assessee regarding the difference in the purchases declared in the Profit and Loss Account and the TCS as per Form 26AS and no addition was made. He further submitted that the payments for such purchases have been made by the respective sister concerns of the assessee, therefore, no addition is called for u/s 69C of the Act. 11. The Ld. DR on the other hand heavily relied on the orders of the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) / NFAC. He submitted that despite ample opportunities granted by the Assessing Officer as well as the CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee failed to reconcile the difference by produci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also his submission that given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case with evidence to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer that the assessee has in fact, not made any such purchases, the purchases are made by the sister concerns of the assessee which have been reflected in their Profit and Loss Account and the payments have been made by them from their respective bank accounts and that the assessee is in no way concerned with such purchases made from the suppliers who have wrongly quoted the PAN of the assessee firm. 14. We find some merit in the above arguments of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. A perusal of the sample bills placed at pages 14 to 35 of the paper book shows that the invoices were raised in the names of the sister concerns of the assessee whereas the PAN of the assessee has been quoted instead of the PAN of the purchasers. The payments for such invoices are also reflected in some of the invoices which are the bank accounts of the sister concerns. However, these vital documents were completely ignored by the lower authorities although these were produced before them. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
