ALLADINI PATRA,KORAPUT vs. ITO, JEYPORE

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-1,

Bhubaneswar, dated 26.5.2015 for the assessment year 2010-2011.

confirming the addition of Rs.9,72,000/- made by the Assessing Officer as

unexplained sundry creditors.

authorities and materials available on record. In the instant case, the

2 IT A No. 360 /CT K/20 15 Asse ss ment Y ear :20 10- 201 1 assessee is engaged in the business of trading in books under the name &

style of Ambica Book Centre. The Assessing Officer observed that in the total

of sundry creditors in the balance sheet of Rs.25,93,670.81, the assessee has

shown Rs.9,72,000/- as amounts receivable from District Inspector of School,

Koraput for supply of books. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee

has issued following bills for Rs.9,72,000/- on 30.12.2009:

Sl.No. Bill No. Date Amount (Rs.) 1. 574 30.12.2009 87,578/- 2. 575 30.12.2009 77,800/- 3. 576 30.12.2009 89,735/- 4. 577 30.12.2009 95,564/- 5. 578 30.12.2009 88,587/- 6. 579 30.12.2009 76,010/- 7. 580 30.12.2009 68,491/- 8. 581 30.12.2009 80,968/- 9. 582 30.12.2009 73,807/- 10. 583 30.12.2009 83,171 11. 584 30.12.2009 77,224/- 12. 585 30.12.2009 73,165 Total 9,72,000

received Rs.9,72,000/- on 4.3.2010 from the District Inspector of School,

Koraput against the sale of books made on 30.12.2009. The contention of

the assessee before the Assessing Officer was that the above bills were

proforma bills submitted to the District Inspector of School, Koraput on

30.12.2009 for supply of library books based on which the District Inspector

of School, Koraput issued a cheque for Rs.9,72,000/- on 4.3.2010 to the

assessee. The books were supplied in the next financial year. Hence, the

3 IT A No. 360 /CT K/20 15 Asse ss ment Y ear :20 10- 201 1 District Inspector of School, Koraput has been reflected as creditors in the

balance sheet as on 31.3.2010 by the assessee. However, the Assessing

Officer was not satisfied and added Rs.9,72,000/- u/s.69 of the Act as bogus

credit.

cheque for Rs.9,72,000/- dated 4.3.2010 was received from the District

Inspector of School, Koraput, which was credited in the bank account of the

assessee on 4.3.2010. He further pointed out from same annexure-4 that the

assessee has made payment through cheque No.162235 dated 20.2.2010 for

Rs.5,50,000/- to Grantha Mandir, Cuttack and another cheque was also given

to same party being cheque No.162236 dt.24.2.2010 for Rs.1,50,000/- as

advance for supply of books. Further, ld A.R. pointed out from annexure -6

that on 27.3.2010, the assessee issued a cheque for Rs.1,19,235/- being

Cheque No.162249 to Maa Sarada Publication, which was also for supply of

books. He pointed out that as the supply of books were received in the

subsequent financial year, therefore, in the balance sheet prepared on

31.3.2010, Rs.8,19,235/- was shown as amount receivable from the suppliers

namely, Maa Sarada Publication and Grantha Mandir. He further pointed from

annexures -11,12 & 13 that the Head Master, New U.P.School, Lankaput,

4 IT A No. 360 /CT K/20 15 Asse ss ment Y ear :20 10- 201 1 Koraput has issued acknowledgement on 7.4.2010 for receipt of 378 numbers

of books. Further, the Head Master, Upper Primary School, Lendrimaliguda

has issued acknowledgement on 9.4.2010 for receipt of 378 numbers of books

from the D.I. of Schools, Koraput and similarly, the Head Master, Upper

Primary School, Ganipadar has also issued a certificate dated 6.4.2010 for

receipt of 378 numbers of books from the District Inspector of School,

Koraput. By pointing out these evidences, it was submitted that the supply of

books to schools were made in the succeeding financial year and, therefore,

the assessee accounted for the sale of Rs.9,72,000/- by raising invoices on

DI, Koraput being Invoice No.1 dated 31.8.2010. The same was duly shown

as sale in the immediately succeeding assessment year 2011-12 and the

income therefrom was shown in the return of income filed by the assessee.

Hence, it was his submission that the addition made by the Assessing Officer

and confirmed by ld CIT(A) in the presence ofoverwhelming evidences, was

not justified.

on 4.3.2010 by cheque from the District Inspector of School, Koraput for

supply of books to the schools as directed by the District Inspector of School,

Koraput. It is also not in dispute that in order to procure the said books, the

5 IT A No. 360 /CT K/20 15 Asse ss ment Y ear :20 10- 201 1 assessee paid advance to the suppliers on 22.3.2010 also by cheque. It is

also not in dispute from the certificates of the Head Masters of Schools, filed

in Annexures-11,12 & 13 that the books were actually supplied by the

assessee in the subsequent financial year relevant to assessment year 2011-

Rs.9,72,000/- by raising invoices on DI of Schools on 30.8.2010. It is also

not disputed by the revenue that the assessee has disclosed the sale of

Rs.9,72,000/- in the return of income filed by the assessee for assessment

year 2011-12. The assessee has also filed copy of its balance sheet evidencing

the fact of showing the District Inspector of School, Koraput as the creditor in

the year ended on 31.3.2010 and showing the advance made to supplier of

Rs.8,19,235/- as debtors in the balance sheet. The explanation of the

assessee is that on 30.12.2009, the assessee has raised proforma invoices,

which were submitted to the District Inspector of School, Koraput so as to

enable him to make advance payment of Rs.9,72,000/- to the assessee for

supply of books to Schools nominated by the District Inspector of School,

Koraput has been brushed aside by the Assessing Officer without giving any

reasons. I find that the explanation of the assessee is a plausible one and can

be accepted in the given facts and circumstances of the case. I also observe

from the bills dated 30.12.2009 that the assessee has stated in the heading

“these bills as credit bills”. The same were to be given to the District Inspector

of School, Koraput as an estimated price for supply of books to the designated

6 IT A No. 360 /CT K/20 15 Asse ss ment Y ear :20 10- 201 1 schools by the District Inspector of School, Koraput based on which advance

payments were made to the assessee. I am of the considered view that the

income can be taxed once and the same income cannot be taxed twice. It is

not disputed by the revenue that the assessee has disclosed sales of

Rs.9,72,000/- in its return of income for assessment year 2011-12.

Therefore, same amount cannot be treated as unexplained credit of the

assessee and brought to tax in the year under appeal. Hence, I set aside the

orders of lower authorities and delete the addition of Rs.9,72,000/- and allow

the ground of appeal of the assessee.

Cuttack; Dated 03/01 /2017 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Smt. Alladina Patra, Prop. M/s. Ambika Book Centre, Main Road, Koraput 2. The Respondent. ITO, Ward-2, Jeypore 3. The CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar 4. CIT, Bhubaneswar. 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy//

ASST.REGISTRAR, ITAT, Cuttack

7 IT A No. 360 /CT K/20 15 Asse ss ment Y ear :20 10- 201 1