Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed its income tax return for AY 2007-08. During scrutiny, the AO issued a notice under Section 133(6) to suppliers and found a discrepancy of Rs.11,77,595/- between the assessee's and supplier's accounts, which was added to the assessee's income under Section 69C.
Held
The Id Addl/JCIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal, affirming the AO's order. The Tribunal, in its observations, noted that the assessee was not confronted with the discrepancy and was not allowed cross-examination of the supplier, but the final decision of the Tribunal is not available on this page.
Key Issues
Whether the addition under Section 69C for account discrepancy is valid when the assessee was not confronted with the discrepancy or allowed cross-examination of the supplier.
Sections Cited
143(1), 133(6), 69C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Assessment Year : 2007-2008
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year 2007-08 at Rs.2,67,070/-, which was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny through CASS and statutory notices were issued and duly served on the assessee. In response to the said notices, the assessee furnished before the AO the details/evidences as called for. The Assessing Officer issued notice u/s.133(6) of the Act to the suppliers M/s. B.N.Chatterjee & Brothers, which was duly replied. Upon comparing with copy supplied by the supplier, the Assessing Officer noted from the copy of account furnished by the assessee that there is difference of Rs.11,77,595/- and, accordingly, added the same to the income of the assessee u/s. 69C of the Act.
In the appellate proceedings, the ld Addl/JCIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by simply affirming the order of the AO.
After considering the rival submissions and perusing the materials available on record, I find that in this case, the Assessing Officer has called for the confirmation from the supplier, which revealed a discrepancy of Rs.11,77,595/- vis-à-vis the books of account maintained by the assessee and the books maintained by the supplier, which was added to the income of the assessee u/s. 69C of the Act. However, we observe that the assessee has not been controverted with the said discrepancy as shown in the account of the suppliers vis-à-vis the assessee’s account. We note that no cross examination has been allowed to the assessee in respect of the said P a g e 2 | 3