Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR
Before: S/SHRI N.S SAINI & PAVAN KUMAR GADALE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR
BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No. 01/Rpr/2014 Assessment Year : 2009-2010
M/s. Bajrang Conveyors, 28, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, - Sector-C, Industrial Estae, 2(1), Mahima Complex, Sirgitti, Bilaspur Vyapar Vihar, Bilasopur PAN/GIR No.AAFFB 2255 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)
Assessee by : Shri G.S.Agrawal, AR Revenue by : Shri O.P.Chaudhary, DR
Date of Hearing : 11/01/ 2018 Date of Pronouncement : 15 /01/ 2018
O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, JM
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A)-
Bilaspur, dated20.8.2013 for the assessment year 2009-2010.
The first issue relates to disallowance of Rs.27,49,190/- by the lower
authorities treating the same as advance received for supply of goods as
bogus trading liability.
The relevant facts are like this. The assessee derives income from job
works and manufacturing of conveyor rollers, Idlers and system. The
2 ITA No. 01/Rpr/2014 Assessment Year : 2009-2010
Assessing Officer found that the assessee has shown gross profit @ 8.94%
and net profit @ 1.33% on a total turnover of Rs.1,42,69,228/- after giving
interest & remuneration to partners. The assessee has maintained its books
of account on mercantile system. The Assessing Officer noticed that an
advance of Rs.27,49,796/- was shown as liability received by the assessee
from M/s. Aditya Renewable Resources. On perusal of account of the party in
the books of the assessee, it was found that Rs.27,49,796/- has been
accumulated by receiving four cheques on different dates. On enquiry, the
Assessing Officer gathered that there are mismatch in the account. He
further found that M/s. Aditya Renewable Resources used to purchase
finished goods from it and the party booked the supplied goods as purchase
whereas the assessee firm has booked the same as advance. The assessee
explained that the party purchased the goods for a particular project and the
whole project material was not sent at a time but sent by four consignments
and, accordingly, whenever the whole segment of project items were sent to
the named party, then whole realization value of Rs.38,38,543/- dated
31.10.2009 had been accounted for in the next assessment year. The above
explanation of the assessee was not convinced to the Assessing Officer, who
observed that the assessee had converted revenue receipt of
Rs.27,49,,190/- as an advance and showed it as liability in the balance
sheet, whereas the liability does not exist. Therefore, he treated the amount
3 ITA No. 01/Rpr/2014 Assessment Year : 2009-2010
as bogus liability and added the same to the income of the assessee u/s.68
of the Act.
On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer.
At the time of hearing, ld A.R. submitted that the addition made by the
Assessing Officer with respect to transaction of Rs.27,49,190/- has been
considered and the invoice was raised in the financial year 2009-2010
relevant to assessment year 2010-2011. Ld A.R. submitted the paper book
disclosing copy of invoice and the calculation of the stock.
Ld D.R. relied on the orders of lower authorities.
We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of lower
authorities and materials available on record. The undisputed facts of the
case are that an advance of Rs.27,49,796/- was shown as liability received
by the assessee from M/s. Aditya Renewable Resources. On perusal of
account of the party in the books of the assessee, it was found that
Rs.27,49,796/- has been accumulated by receiving four cheques on different
dates. Before us, ld A.R. submitted that the addition made by the Assessing
Officer with respect to transaction of Rs.27,49,190/- has been considered
and the invoice was raised in the financial year 2009-2010 relevant to
assessment year 2010-2011. To substantiate, ld A.R. submitted the paper
book disclosing copy of invoice and the calculation of the stock with
4 ITA No. 01/Rpr/2014 Assessment Year : 2009-2010
documents. We are of the considered view that the assessee should be
provided an opportunity to explain the details alongwith statements filed
before us and the Assessing Officer has to verify whether the assessee has
raised sales bills in the assessment year 2010-2011 and pass the order on
merits. The Assessing Officer is directed to afford proper opportunity of
hearing to the assessee before adjudicating the issue afresh.
The next issue relates to addition of Rs.8,60,783/- as suppressed
sales.
Ld A.R. of the assessee submitted that the above addition is included
in Rs.8,60,783/- as suppressed sales.
As we have restored the addition of Rs.27,49,190/- to the file of the
Assessing Officer, the addition of Rs.8,60,783/- being suppressed sales is
also restored to the file of the Assessing officer with the same direction as
give above. This issue is also allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical
purposes.
Order pronounced on 15 /01/2018. Sd/- sd/- (N.S Saini) (Pavan Kumar Gadale) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIALMEMBER
5 ITA No. 01/Rpr/2014 Assessment Year : 2009-2010
Raipur; Dated 15 /01/2018 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : M/s. Basjrang Conveyors, 28, Sector-C, Industrial Estae, Sirgitti, Bilaspur 2. The Income Tax Officer, -2(1), Mahima Complex, Vyapar Vihar, Bilasopur 3. The CIT(A)- Bilaspur 4. Pr.CIT-Bilaspur 5. DR, ITAT, Raipur 6. Guard file. //True Copy//
BY ORDER,
SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, Raipur