Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH
Before: Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi
ORDER Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 10/05/2016 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-13, Kolkata for the assessment year 2009-10.
The assessee has raised the following effective ground:-
1. 1. That the Ld. CIT(A) had erred in sustaining the addition of closing balance of unconfirmed sundry debtors for Rs.4,90,117/- without appreciating the fact that the entire sale consideration of Rs.9,76,208/- has been brought to tax.
2. That Appellant reserves right to raise additional grounds.
Ground No- 1 relates to the addition of Rs.4,90,117/-. The AO on verification of the replies received u/s. 133(6) found discrepancy between the transaction details furnished by the assessee and details filed by M/s.New Ravi Shankar Chemical of 232, R. N. Tagore Road Kolkata-50. The purchase as per M/s New Ravi Shankar chemical ledger is Rs.7,74,812/- and closing balance is Rs. NIL, whereas, the debit balance of the assessee is Rs. 4,90,117/-as per list of the sundry debtors filed by the assessee. In reply, it was submitted by the assessee, that debtor M/s. New Ravi Shankar Chemicals has given false statement and as per the record of the assessee there is still sundry debtor balance of Rs. 4,90,117/-with them. The M/s. Tirupati Chemicals explanation of the assessee was found not tenable by the AO as no legal action initiated against M/s New Ravi Shankar Chemicals knowing fully on 21-10-2011 the ledger of said debtor showing nil balance. The said claim of the assessee on account of debit balance of Rs. 4,90,117/- as found towards sundry debtor in balance sheet was rejected and added to the total income of the Assessee.
Before the CIT-A, the assessee submitted that the M/s New Ravi Shankar purchased chemicals for a sum of Rs.9,76,208/- out of which, the Assessee received a sum of Rs.7,70,000/- from the M/s New Ravi Shankar Chemicals industries and receipt of which acknowledged by duly signing the tax invoice cum challans by the said customer. The said customer did not pay a single amount out of that balance and the Assessee given reminder for clearing the dues and are also thinking to file a suit against the said assessee if payment is not made by the said customer. The Assessee also contended that the order of AO is whimsical to disallow a sum of Rs. 4,90,117/- on the basis of confirmation received from the said M/s. New Ravi Shankar Chemicals industries u/s.133(6) of the Act without enquiring the genuineness of transaction with the said party. The CIT-A confirmed the order of AO by observing that the Assessee could not reconcile the discrepancy by producing sale payments, the relevant portion of which is reproduced herein below: I have gone through the submissions of the appellant and AO's order. Perusal of submissions of the appellant itself is evident that appellant has not tried to reconcile the difference with the concurrence of the party rather than appellant has alleged the party for' suppressing its sales. The findings of the AO have not been controverted with the sale payment and receipt or the banking channels with transportation details and the receipt of the debtors. Keeping in view of the aforesaid facts brought on record by the AO and unilateral contention of the appellant without supporting evidences, the addition made by the AO is upheld and the ground of the appeal is dismissed. In result the appeal of the appellant is partly allowed.
Before us, the Ld.AR reiterated the submissions as made before the CIT-A and urged to allow the appeal. The Ld.DR submits that the Assessee failed to show the evidence regarding the sale and purchases and he can not take a plea that he did not receive the impugned amount for the said customer and it is not a case of Assessee that every transaction caused
M/s. Tirupati Chemicals through banking channel as the Assessee admitted that he was receiving in cash and prayed to dismiss the appeal.
Heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. We find that the assessee’s contention was that the said customer has suppressed the transactions and tax invoice bills and paid Rs.7,74,812/- against the sale of chemicals of Rs.9,76,208/-. The AO brought to the notice of the assessee said discrepancy of Rs. 4,90,117/-for reconciliation during the course of assessment proceedings, in reply, it was submitted that as per the record of the assessee, there is still balance is existing showing the said customer as sundry debtor for Rs. 4,90,117/- and said debtor has offered false statement. It is pertinent to note that the said amount of sundry debtor as claimed by the assessee shown in his balance sheet as debit balance from M/s. New Ravi Shankar Chemicals to the tune of Rs.4,90,117/- and it is clear that the same has been shown in profit and loss account as sales and offered for taxation. In view of the same, we find force in the submissions of the Assessee and the orders of CIT-A and AO are not justified, accordingly, the sole ground raised by the Assessee is allowed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed Order pronounced in the open Court on 31 -01-2017