DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALAJEE HITEC ROLLING PRIVATELIMITED, PATNA

At the outset, we note that the appeal of the revenue is barred by limitation by 04 days. At the time of hearing, the ld. DR explained the reason for delay in filing the appeal. The Ld. AR did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the delay is for bonafide and genuine reasons and hence, we condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal.

After hearing the rival contentions of the parties and perusing the material available on record including the appellate order passed by the ld. CIT(A), we observe that the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is very reasoned and speaking order which is in consonance with the principle that once the assessee has already offered to tax the income on the said purchases by showing the same in the profit and loss account, then there is no logic to add any further amount in respect of the said purchases. We find that the ld. CIT(A) has relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Courts delivered in the cases of PCIT vs Agson Global (P.) Ltd, reported in [2022] 286 Taxman 519 (Delhi), DCIT vs Sharp Mint Ltd, reported in [2024] 159 taxmann.com 1381 (Delhi - Trib.), PCIT vs Nitin Ramdeoji Lohia, reported in, [2022] 145 taxmann.com 546 (Bombay), wherein it has been held that no disallowance of the purchases can be made so long as the corresponding sales have been accepted.

In the present case, the ld. CIT(A) recorded a finding of fact that the exact quantity of the goods has been sold out of the purchases made by the assessee. Therefore, we are inclined to hold that the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition is just and proper for which no interference is called for.