J. P. MILLS,BALOTRA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 317/JODH/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur18 August 2023AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that once the assessee provided confirmations with addresses, the onus shifted to the AO to verify. Since the AO did not conduct inquiries, the addition was deleted for most creditors.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 88,353/- on account of sundry creditors for whom PAN numbers were not provided. The assessee had submitted confirmations with addresses for most creditors, but not for one.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee discharged its onus by providing creditor confirmations with addresses, and whether the AO's failure to conduct independent inquiries justified the addition.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR

Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

For Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Nair, JCIT-DR
Hearing: 14.08.2023Pronounced: 18.08.2023

ORDER

PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-2, Udaipur dated 19.02.2018, emanating from assessment order dated 09.02.2016 passed under section 143(3) of the Act for A.Y. 2013-14. Findings & Analysis 2. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. Ld.AR had filed paper book containing copy of the details submitted before lower authorities. 3. In this case, the AO had made addition of Rs. 88,353/-. The AO observed that in case of certain creditors, assessee had not filed PAN numbers. The list of creditors is as under:-

J.P. Mills S.No. Name of the Creditor Amount 1. Manoj Textile Mills 11,803/- 2. S.M. Energy Taknik & 22,936/- Electronics 3. Daulal Rathi 47,336/- 4. Kothari Textile Agency 2,348/- 5. Ramesh Kumar Jhunjhunu 2,978/- Wala 6. Sarita Textile Agency 209/- 7. Shiv Shakti Agency 1,283/- Total 88,353/-

4.

The AO held that assessee failed to prove genuineness of the transaction and creditworthiness. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition.

5.

We have perused the submission which was filed by the assessee before the lower authorities. On perusal of the submission of the ld. AR, it is observed in following cases. Manoj Textile Mills S.M. Energy Taknik & Electronics Daulal Rathi Kothari Textile Agency Ramesh Kumar Jhunjhunu Wala Shiv Shakti Agency The assessee had filed copy of confirmations containing address of the entities. These were sundry creditors pertaining to the business of the assessee of earlier years. Once assessee had filed address of the creditors, the onus shifted to the AO to verify creditors, if he wish to. However, in this case, the AO had not conducted any enquiries. The AO merely added these creditors as J.P. Mills PAN numbers were not provided. 6. In this facts & circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that once assessee filed confirmations of the creditors containing address of the creditors, assessee fulfilled its onus therefore, we direct the AO to delete the addition except of Sarita Textile Agency. For Sarita Textile Agency, the assessee has not filed copy of the confirmation containing address. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced on 18th August, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 18/08/2023 Sh.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →