9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 559X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... these bills, they cannot be considered as evidence for transport expense as the place of origin, place of destination, lorry number, actual transportation expenses etc. are not appearing in most of these bills. These bills clearly mention that they are for purchase of materials, such as sand, kapdi, dust and other building materials. Further, the evidence as produced does not explain the correctness of expenditure and the exorbitant increase in transportation expense during the year, particularly when the Petrol expense had also increased substantially. No reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A). In the absence of any cogent explanation in respect of abnormal increase in transport expense and also in the absence of complete bills and vouchers and evidences for incurring these expenditures, the addition as confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is upheld. Decided against assessee. - Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member And Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Shri S. N. Divetia Shri Samir Vora, A.Rs. For the Respondent : Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr. DR ORDER PER SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, AM: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the National F ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal. 5. Shri S. N. Divatia, Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that the assessee had furnished certain additional evidences before the Ld. CIT(A), which was not properly examined by him. He explained that ledger account copy of all the parties, in respect of which disallowance of Rs. 36,33,945/- was made by the AO, was produced before the Ld. CIT(A). After considering these ledger accounts, the Ld. CIT(A) had allowed relief of Rs. 48,708/- only and confirmed the balance amount of Rs. 35,85,237/-. He further submitted that the transportation invoices in respect of these parties was also produced which was not considered in right perspective. According to the Ld. Counsel, the transport expenditure as claimed by the assessee was not in respect of only transport material but they were composite bills in respect of purchase of materials and transport thereof. He further submitted that the books of accounts were not rejected by the AO before making the disallowance. 6. Per contra, Smt. Mamta Singh, Ld. SR. DR submitted that the Ld ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... O and detail produced during the appeal proceeding. The issue is discussed name- wise in the same serial as mentioned by the assessee. Bijal J. Patel 12. Ledger account of F.Y. 2016-17 and 2017-18 have been submitted. Ledger account of 2018-19 has not been submitted. It might be that there was no transaction during F.Y. 2018-19. It is to be noted that during two financial years the assessee has only two transactions with Bijal D. Patel. Assessee gave an advance of Rs. 2,00,000/- to M/s Patel on 12.07.2016 and the same was squared off on 12.05.2017 by transport expenses of the same amount in round figure. In the two ledgers, there is no mention of any journal voucher which indicates that the ledger is not based on any journal voucher/journal entry. It lacks evidentiary value. The entry of transportation expenses as on 15.05.2017 does not mention any bill/invoice no. also. The assessee has produced the copy of invoice from Bijal D. Patel. It has been signed by somebody else and it does not have any number (invoice no.). Only date of 15.05.2017 is there and there are four entries of Rs. 45,000/-, Rs. 1,36,100/-, Rs. 10,000/- and Rs. 8,900/-. All the figures are in round figure. No tru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al. All these go against the human probability that the transporter is actually a transporter and there has been any transportation. 16. The appellant assessee has produced the ledger of Shivani Patel. In the ledger credit entry of Rs. 10,73,372/- has been passed on 28.02.2018 though the so-called invoice was issued on 30.11.2017. So, this also falsifies the claim of expenditure. Further the assessee has submitted the ledger of this party for 2018-19 also. This ledger shows some advances/payment to the transporter on different dates starting from 03.04.2018 and a single bill of Rs. 12,52,000/- is found credited on 31.01.2019. But here this credit is for job work. So, the transporter in A.Y. 2018-19 became a job work contractor for the assessee in next year. Payments were given in April, July, August and October but one percent TDS was done on 31.03.2019. So, even this ledger indicates that transactions shown are in the nature of accommodation entry and these are bogus. Nitya Transport 17. The assessee has produced the ledger of Aerotech Enterprises, i.e. the assessee in the books of Nitya Transport whereas in the other cases it has produced the ledger of transporters in its own boo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce no. 3 and 4 has been generated on 31.01.2018 and invoices no. 5 and 6 have been generated on 15.02.2018. It means that from 01.04.2017 to 15.02.2018, the transporter has generated only six invoices and out of that all six have been generated for the assessee. Ledger gives the impression that during the whole financial year, Manisha G. Patel has done transportation works for the assessee on six occasions totaling Rs. 10,70,013/-. The ledger does not give reference to any bill no. or any journal voucher number. So, ledger does not have any evidentiary value and the carting invoices are just against human probability that the transporter did not do any transporting work for any other person during the financial year from 01.04.2017 to 15.02.2018. So, the expenditure is just an accommodation entry. Conclusion:- 22. Under the facts and circumstances discussed above the addition made by the Assessing Officer is confirmed barring an amount of Rs. 48,708/- added on account of payment to Nitya Transport as this expenditure is related to assessment year 2017-18. So, out of total addition of Rs. 36,33,945/-, the addition of Rs. 35,85,237/- is confirmed. The assessee gets relief of Rs. 48,7 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o. From the sample copy of bills and vouchers of the transport expense brought on record, it is found that these bills were not in respect of transport expense. As rightly pointed out by the Ld. CIT(A), no lorry details are appearing in these bills/vouchers. Further, the details regarding place of transport i.e. the place of origin and the place of destination is not found mentioned in all the bills/vouchers. Only in some of the bills the destination is appearing. Rather these bills are found to be in respect of purchases of materials and have details of goods, weight, rate and total amount. Merely because the word transportation is mentioned in these bills, they cannot be considered as evidence for transport expense as the place of origin, place of destination, lorry number, actual transportation expenses etc. are not appearing in most of these bills. These bills clearly mention that they are for purchase of materials, such as sand, kapdi, dust and other building materials. Further, the evidence as produced does not explain the correctness of expenditure and the exorbitant increase in transportation expense during the year, particularly when the Petrol expense had also increased s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
