Tribunal Restores Issues for Fresh Consideration

The tribunal restored both issues back to the respective authorities for fresh consideration. The assessee's appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, and the tribunal directed the authorities to provide the assessee with an opportunity to substantiate its claims with appropriate evidence.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance of purchase for Rs. 13.30 lakhs.
2. Difference in the amount of purchases resulting in a disallowance of Rs. 2.39 lakhs.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Disallowance of purchase for Rs. 13.30 lakhs:

The primary issue involves the disallowance of purchases amounting to Rs. 13.30 lakhs from two parties, M/s. Am Pee Fabrics and M/s. Rinowa Creation. Notices issued to these parties under Section 133(6) were returned unserved by postal authorities, and the assessee failed to provide their updated addresses or permanent account numbers (PAN). The assessee reiterated its inability to furnish this information in the set aside proceedings, leading to the disallowance being confirmed. The tribunal emphasized that the identity and existence of the payees were crucial to establish the genuineness of the purchases. The tribunal noted that the assessee did not provide any substantial evidence such as PAN, Sales Tax or Excise Registration, TIN, or even the names of the persons managing the affairs of the said firms. The tribunal highlighted that the primary onus to establish the genuineness of the transactions was on the assessee.

The assessee argued that non-response from the parties to notices under Section 133(6) should not automatically lead to the inference of bogus purchases. The tribunal acknowledged that indirect evidence, such as transportation and processing of goods, could support the genuineness of the purchases. However, the tribunal found no findings or arguments raised by the assessee before the authorities below regarding this indirect evidence. The tribunal decided to restore the matter back to the file of the first appellate authority to allow the assessee another opportunity to establish the genuineness of the purchases with appropriate evidence.

2. Difference in the amount of purchases resulting in a disallowance of Rs. 2.39 lakhs:

The second issue pertains to the difference in the amount of purchases, leading to a disallowance of Rs. 2.39 lakhs. The assessee argued that the purchases per its books were higher in the case of one party and lower for the other, and the Revenue had added both amounts without considering the nature of the differences. The assessee contended that the copies of accounts of both parties were not furnished to it, preventing it from providing any reconciliation.

The tribunal observed that for a valid disallowance to be effected, there must be a finding that the assessee had not recorded its purchases truly and correctly in its books of accounts. The tribunal emphasized that the Revenue should have provided the assessee with the copy of the account statement of the assessee's ledger account as appearing in the books of the suppliers. The tribunal decided to restore this issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer (A.O.) to decide afresh, supplying the assessee with the necessary materials and affording an opportunity of being heard.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, the tribunal restored both issues back to the respective authorities for fresh consideration. The assessee's appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, and the tribunal directed the authorities to provide the assessee with an opportunity to substantiate its claims with appropriate evidence. The order was pronounced on April 5, 2013.

---