Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2025 (3) TMI 719

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e remand proceeding, some confirmations were received in response to the notice issued. Hence, on the principle of preponderance of probability, which governs the assessment proceedings and the assessment of income, the sundry creditors earlier treated as unverifiable only for the reason of non-compliance on the part of the assessee/creditors is not wholly correct and only on this ground the liability claim could not be disallowed. As on appreciation of the submission made, the outstanding liability on account of Sarada Trading are directed to be deleted on furnishing of the required evidence before the AO as the same was not filed earlier before the Ld. AO and is additional evidence. That leaves a sum for which the assessee has submitte .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... assessment order u/s 144 of the Act, dated 02.12.2016 of the DCIT, Circle-23, Hooghly while the name of the respondent has been left blank in Form No. 36. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: "We have already declared the facts that SARADA TRADING is one of the proprietary Concern of the Assessee and also submitted the confirmation from the same. Because the assessing officer has not rejected the purchases or the payment for the creditors. Because there is no remission or cessation of trading liability." 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had submitted belated return through electronic medium on 30.09.2013 disclosing total income of Rs. 14,15,020/-. The return was s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... CIT(A), the quantum of disallowance was reduced to Rs. 35,28,140/- from Rs. 49,86,306/- made in the assessment order as sundry creditors amounting to Rs. 14,15,020/- had confirmed the balances in response to notices issued under section 133(6) of the Act. The assessee disputed the remaining addition as well. The Ld. CIT(A) has reproduced the remand report in respect of the claim of Rs. 49,86,306/- as sundry creditors (page 2 of the remand report of the Ld. AO has inadvertently been omitted) and out of which total disallowance being sundry creditors outstanding in Sarada Electronics and Sarada Trading at Rs. 29,40,216/- and Rs. 5,87,924/- respectively i.e. Rs. 35,28,140/- were added as the notices u/s 133(6) of the Act were returned unserved .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 4 of the Act. The assessee had responded to the first notice received in September, 2015 and the second notice was served on 22.01.2016 but adequate opportunity was not allowed. Notices were issued to the creditors, many of which confirmed the outstanding balances. The assessee could not file proper submission before the Ld. AO, therefore, the assessment order was made u/s 144 of the Act. Even in the remand report, the outstanding balance in the name of the proprietary business of the assessee in the name of Sarada Trading in the books of Sarada Electronics, which was on account of inter-unit transactions between the two concerns of the assessee himself, also was added as the notice issued was received back with a remark 'not known' and a s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ple of preponderance of probability, which governs the assessment proceedings and the assessment of income, the sundry creditors earlier treated as unverifiable only for the reason of non-compliance on the part of the assessee/creditors is not wholly correct and only on this ground the liability claim could not be disallowed. The assessee contends non-application of provisions of section 41(1) of the Act, however, the disallowance has not been made specifically under section 41(1) the Act. The liability remaining unverifiable does not automatically lead to application of section 41(1) of the Act. The assessee further contends by virtue of the certificate of the Chartered Accountant that all the liabilities have been paid off as on 31.03.202 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates