TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) whether the rejection of books of account was justified; (ii) whether the addition of unsecured loans as unexplained cash credits was sustainable; (iii) whether cash deposits made during the demonetisation period could be treated as unexplained cash credits; and (iv) whether commission income could be estimated on the basis of alleged accommodation entries.
Issue (i): whether the rejection of books of account was justified.
Analysis: The defects relied upon were only that some notices to suppliers were returned unserved and that full customer details for cash sales were not available. The assessee had furnished purchase summaries, sales summaries, confirmations, invoices, stock details, bank statements and VAT returns, and the audited books were not found defective. The stock summary also showed movement of goods, and the mere non-service of notices did not establish bogus purchases or justify rejection of the books.
Conclusion: The rejection of books of account was not justified and was set aside in favour of the assessee.
Issue (ii): whether the addition of unsecured loans as unexplained cash credits was sustainable.
Analysis: The unsecured loans were supported only by computer-generated confirmations that lacked PAN, address and signatures, while the first appellate relief was said to rest on additional evidence not confronted to the Assessing Officer. The matter therefore required fresh examination to address the evidentiary deficiency and the objection of breach of procedural fairness under Rule 46A.
Conclusion: The issue was remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
Issue (iii): whether cash deposits made during the demonetisation period could be treated as unexplained cash credits.
Analysis: The deposits were shown to have been made out of cash available in the regular books, arising from recorded cash sales of jewellery. Since the books were accepted, the sales and purchases were also to be accepted, and the existence of sufficient cash balance in the books explained the deposits. The addition could not be sustained merely on suspicion during demonetisation when the stock and sales trail was maintained.
Conclusion: The cash deposit addition was deleted in favour of the assessee.
Issue (iv): whether commission income could be estimated on the basis of alleged accommodation entries.
Analysis: The sales and corresponding receipts were recorded in the books and supported by the stock register. No material was brought to show absence of actual movement of goods, and the presumption that the receipts represented accommodation entries was unsupported by the records. In such circumstances, estimation of commission on genuine trade receipts was not warranted.
Conclusion: The commission addition was deleted in favour of the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The assessee succeeded on the core additions relating to books rejection, cash deposits and alleged accommodation-entry commission, while the unsecured-loan issue was sent back for reconsideration.
Ratio Decidendi: Where purchases, sales, stock movement and cash balances are duly recorded in audited books, additions cannot be sustained merely on suspicion, non-service of section 133(6) notices, or presumptions about demonetisation cash deposits or accommodation entries.
TaxTMI 
