Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA
O R D E R PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: The assessee has come in appeal against the order dated 17.06.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, New Delhi (hereinafter referred as “learned First Appellate Authority” or in short “FAA”) in Appeal no. 10544/538/CIT(A)-7/Del/2018-19, for the assessment year 2015-16, arising out of the assessment order dated 11.12.2018 u/s 153C/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as the “Act”), passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward- 21(4), New Delhi (hereinafter referred in short as “Ld. AO”).
2. Heard and perused the record.
3. As the case was called for hearing, none attended for the assessee inspite of notices being issued repeatedly. The learned DR was heard, who supported the finding of tax authorities below.
4. Appreciating the material on record it can be observed that the assessee is in appeal raising following grounds:
“1. That ITO Ward 21(4) New Delhi erred in making addition of Rs.136000/- to our income and CIT (Appeal VII) has not considered Affidavit and Cross Examination.
That ITO ward 21(4) New Delhi and CIT appeal has not considered our Affidavit of Director Incharge of Assessee Company .
That learned ITO 21(4) New Delhi issued notice U/s 133(6) to M/s GD Foods Mfg India P Ltd for Verification of Transaction. No reply received by learned ITO as per the Assessment Order.
That ITO and CIT has not summoned various persons of M/s GD Foods Mfg. India P Ltd. as requested vide our letter filed on records.
That notice U/s 271(l)(c) may please kept in abeyance till disposal of Appeal by Hon'ble Tribunal.
6. That demand of Rs. 61431/- be kept in abeyance till disposal of Appeal by Hon'ble Tribunal.
That company be allowed to add/amend/rectify any grounds of appeals.”
5. It can be appreciated that in para 2, 3.2 & 3.3 of CIT(A)’s order following relevant observations have been made;
“2. Brief facts of the case are that on the basis of information received from ACIT, Central Circle - 26, New Delhi, proceedings u/s 153C of the Act were initiated as search and seizure operation u/s 132 was conducted on 22.12.2014 at the premises of M/s G. D. Foods & Manufacturing (P) Ltd. & Others and in search some incriminating material has been seized relating to transactions between M/s Roks IT Support Services (P) Ltd. and M/s G. D. Foods & Manufacturing (P) Ltd. A satisfaction note of ACIT, Central Circle - 26, New Delhi dated 31.12.2016 was also received on 20.02.2017 along with his forwarding letter F No. ACIT/CC-26/2016-17/3264 dated 09.02.2017. After receipt of above information, a satisfaction note dated 29.01.2018 by the ITO, Ward 21(4) was again recorded before issuance of notice u/s 153C to the appellant and notice u/s 153C dated was issued. In compliance thereof, the appellant filed return u/s 153C on 10.08.2018 at income of Rs.32,316/-. Order u/s 153C/143(3) was passed on 11.12 2018, Re-assessing the total income at Rs. 1,68,316/- after addition of Rs.1,36,000/- on account of cash purchases during the year. Aggrieved by the reassessment order, the appellant has filed this appeal.”
“3.2 The AO made addition of Rs.1,36,000/- on account of cash purchases. The AO made the addition by observing as under:
“In reply to show cause notice, assessee denied for making any unaccounted cash payment to M/s G. D. Foods & Manufacturing (P) Ltd. However, this office has sufficient material in possession to prove that assessee has made unaccounted cash purchases from M/s G. Foods & Manufacturing (P) Ltd has accepted for unaccounted cash sale to assessee. Hence, this bald denial of assessee is not acceptable. Hence, I am satisfied that assessee has made unaccounted cash purchase of Rs.1,36,000/- from M/s G. D. Foods & Manufacturing (P) Ltd. which is liable to be added back u/s 69C of the I. T. Act."
3.3 During the appellate proceedings, the Ld. AR submitted that the appellant was appointed as distributor of M/s G. D, Foods Mfg. India (P) Ltd. in June 2014 and distributorship was cancelled in September 2015 within a short period of 15 months. The Ld. AR also submitted that they were distributors to M/s. G.D. Foods Mfg. India Pvt. Ltd. for distribution of their products and all sales/Purchases were made by M/S. G.D. Foods Mfg. Pvt. Ltd. by their staff. They were authorized to dispatch the products as per order booked by salesman of M/S. G.D. Foods Mfg. India (P) Ltd. And collect cash/cheque from the market as per Company direction.”
The Bench is of the considered opinion that there is no error in the findings of learned tax authorities below, as there is nothing to indicate as to what prejudice, if any, was caused, for not cross-examination of the witnesses. There is no matter on record to form a different opinion on facts about making cash payments. The grounds raised have no substance and the appeal is dismissed.
Order pronounced in open court on 08.05.2023.