TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Dismissal of Appeals Over Invoicing & Supplier Failure in Tax Assessment Year 2005-2006</h1> <h3>CIT Versus M/s RICE INDIA EXPORTS PVT. LTD.</h3> CIT Versus M/s RICE INDIA EXPORTS PVT. LTD. - tmi Issues:Challenging ITAT order on over-invoicing purchases and failure to produce supplier. Burden of proof in revenue matters. Significance of purchase price difference and inability to produce supplier. Application of section 40A(2) and commercial expediency test in determining expenditure.Analysis:The appeals were filed challenging the ITAT order regarding over-invoicing purchases and failure to produce the supplier for the Assessment Year 2005-2006. The Revenue contended that the respondent-assessee inflated purchases to reduce profits and failed to substantiate purchases from Mr. Sanjay Kumar Garg. The counsel argued that the onus shifted to the Revenue when the assessee provided purchase bills and affidavits. However, the respondent-assessee's failure to produce Mr. Garg was highlighted as a failure to discharge the onus.In revenue matters, the onus of proof is dynamic, shifting from the assessee to the Revenue when evidence is presented. The Revenue possesses powers for evidence discovery, inspection, and production. The ITAT noted that the excess in purchase price from Mr. Garg was only 1.5%, and the inability to produce the supplier did not automatically render the purchases bogus. Citing a Supreme Court decision, it was emphasized that the absence of suppliers does not imply fraudulent transactions. The ITAT found the purchase rate difference insignificant for additional surmises and noted the absence of profit decline or inadequacy in profit earned on those purchases.Referring to the decision in CIT, Bombay Vs. Walchand and Co. Private Ltd., the ITAT emphasized judging expenditures based on commercial expediency from a businessman's perspective. Ultimately, based on the factual findings by the ITAT, which is the final fact-finding authority, it was concluded that no substantial question of law arose in the appeals, leading to their dismissal.This judgment underscores the importance of meeting the burden of proof in revenue matters, the significance of purchase price differences, and the application of legal principles such as section 40A(2) and the commercial expediency test in determining business expenditures.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
