M/S L.B.WINES PRIVATE LIMITTED,LUDHIANA vs. PR.CIT-1, LUDHIANA

By way of this appeal, the assessee assails invocation of revisionary juri iction u/s 263 by Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana-1 (Pr.CIT) for Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16 vide impugned order dated 23-03-2021 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. AO u/s.143(3) of the Act on 22-12-2017. 2. The Ld. AR advanced arguments and made out a case of one of the possible views. The Ld. CIT-DR also advanced arguments and submitted that Ld. AO failed to make requisite enquiries on the issues as flagged in revisionary order. Having heard vehement arguments of both the sides and upon perusal of case records, our adjudication would be as under. The assessee being resident corporate assessee is stated to be engaged in wholesale business of liquor. Proceedings before lower authorities 3.1 From the facts, it emerges that the assessee’s return of income was scrutinized u/s 143(3) and Ld. AO made addition of unvouched expenses for Rs.2.25 Lacs. During the course of assessment proceedings, notices were issued u/s 142(1) on various occasions along with detailed questionnaire / queries wherein the assessee was directed to file the requisite details. The same were duly responded to by the assessee and after due consideration thereof, the assessment was framed by Ld. AO substantially accepting the returned income of the assessee. 3.2 Subsequently, Ld.Pr. CIT, upon perusal of case records, alleged that the assessee did not reflect certain receipts of Rs.125 Lacs from two entities though TDS credit was claimed against the same. The Ld. Pr. CIT also disputed that as per TCS claim, the assessee made purchase of Rs.11.33 Crores whereas the assessee reflected purchases of Rs.5.73 Crores only which was not reconciled by the assessee and Ld. AO failed to apply his mind on this use. The Ld. Pr. CIT also alleged that TCS claim was not properly verified / examined. Lastly, the assessee did not deduct TDS u/s 194I on rental payments of Rs.2.70 Lacs. Since the assessee failed to file any satisfactory response, Ld. Pr. CIT, invoking Explanation-2(a) to Sec.263, set aside the assessment order for reconsideration / verification of these issues as flagged in the revisionary order. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. Our findings and Adjudication 4. From the facts, it emerges that the assessee’s return of income for this year was scrutinized u/s 143(3) and an assessment was framed on 22-12-2017. During the course of assessment proceedings, notices u/s 142(1) with detailed questionnaire was issued on various occasions which were duly been responded to by the assessee and the requisite details were furnished to Ld. AO. In its reply dated 15-12-2017, the assessee furnished details of purchases and sales in the format as required by Ld. AO. The party-wise sales were furnished by the assessee. The assessee also furnished party-wise purchases along with the amount of TCS. The purchase figures of Rs.5.73 Crores as reflected in the financial statements were duly reconciled since the assessee received substantial rebates and discounts. The copies of purchase invoices were also placed before Ld. AO. These details are also placed before us in the paper-book. The TCS amount was arrived at Rs.13.30 Lacs. Similarly, in its reply dated 18-12- 2017, the assessee furnished part-wise rent paid by it during the year. The copies of purchase invoices were also placed before Ld. AO. Upon perusal of all these replies and documents, it could be said that whatever information was called for by Ld. AO, the 4