SARVMANGAL HOLY STORE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 22(3), NEW DELHI

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 25/08/2017 passed by CIT(A)-28, New Delhi for Assessment Year 2014-15.

2. That the illegal and arbitrary additions of Rs.85,54,472/-by treating/assuming bogus commissions paid to different online vendors and Rs. 1,08,39000/- by suspecting the genuineness of purchase and thus making ad-hoc addition 025% of total purchases are illegal and unsustainable ,as the appellant company has all the supporting documents/evidence to establish their claim which were provided both at the time of assessment proceedings and appellate proceedings and which were unjustifiably denied/not accredited by both the Assessing Officer and Appellate Authority.

3. That the Ld. Assessing Officer ,Ward 28(3), New did not provide/confer fair and adequate opportunity to represent the case and adopted biased and arbitrary approach in making whimsical and illegal additions of Rs.1, 93, 93, 472/-to which the Ld. CIT(Appeal)-28, New Delhi upheld and approved without acting judiciously and realistically. 4. That the exorbitant additions has caused undue financial burden on the assessee despite the facts that had satisfactorily placed all the evidence and record before the concerned Assessing Officer and appellate Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)28, New Delhi. 5. That any other ground which may be raised with the permission of this Hon'ble Court.”

3. The assessee company is engaged in the business of Trading Homes and Kitchen Items as Wholesalers & Retailers. The assessee filed return of income on 30/11/2014 declaring an income of Rs. 3,36,020/-. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee paid commission of Rs. 85,54,447/- and claimed as expenditure in profit and loss. The Assessing Officer asked the assessee to file the details along with justification and genuineness of expenses. However, the assessee did not file any details regarding commission paid. Consequently, Assessing Officer disallowed the commission expenses as bogus expenses. Similarly, in respect of purchases, Assessing Officer asked the assessee to produce the purchase bills along with books of accounts. Again the assessee failed to produce the purchase bill in support of purchases made by him during the year under consideration. The Assessing Officer disallowed 25% of total purchases amounting to Rs.1,08,39,000/- and added back to the income of the assessee.