TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (4) TMI 140
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e is reproduced as under, for the sake of convenience: 4. Briefly, in this case of a partnership firm deriving business income from manufacturing of jute printed bags and trading of jute products, return declaring an income of Rs. 16,370/- filed on 25.10.2007 was processed u/s 143(1) on 23.03.2009. Since this case was covered under survey conducted u/s 133A on 24.08.2006, the case was taken up for compulsory scrutiny. During the course of survey, closing stock of Rs. 3,19,801/- was found at the business premises of the appellant. During assessment proceedings, the appellant furnished separate trading for the period 1.4.6 to 24.8.06 and from 24.8.06 to 31.3.07 disclosing G.P. rate of 4.93% for both the period. The closing....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d on physical verification during survey was less than the stock shown in the trading account prepared and filed during the course of assessment proceedings which also goes to show that the appellant has been indulging in making purchases and sales outside the books of accounts. Considering the appellant's explanation nothing but an after-thought and since the true profits from the appellant's books of account cannot be worked out/adduced as such the same were rejected. By referring the provisions of Section 292C, the contents of the books of account & other documents found during survey u/s 133A to be true and also by adopting the figures of input tax credit and output tax credit as per trial balance drawn on the date of survey on 24.08.06....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ners of the firm namely, Sh. Surinder S. Bhatia was found during survey as per which it has forthcoming that the loan of Rs. 2,50,000/- was given on interest @ 12% p.a. for four months of 6.2.06 to 6.6.06. In view of this corroborative and relevant evidence available on record, the A.O. concluded that interest chargeable of Rs. 60,000/- (@ 12% on Rs. 5,00,000/-) has not been disclosed and addition to this extent has been made by the A.O. 4.3 The A.O. further made ad-hoc disallowance for undenying personal usage of car and telephone by the partners as under: (a) Rs. 18,902/- @ 1/5th of car repair & maintenance of Rs. 20596/-, petrol of Rs. 13,250/-, Car depreciation of Rs. 60,66....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y been deleted by the learned first appellate authority in respect of VAT Debt. He relied upon the contention raised by the Revenue in the grounds of appeal. 5. On the contrary learned counsel for the assessee relied upon the order passed by learned CIT(A), Amritsar. Mr. Salil Kapoor, Advocate, learned counsel for the assessee has also made the statement that he does not want to press the cross objection i.e. C.O. No. 13(Asr)/2012 filed in the present appeal and requested that the same may be dismissed as withdrawn. He has also endorsed the same on the original grounds of appeal. 6. Keeping in view the statement made by Mr. Salil Kapoor, Advocate, learned counsel for the assessee, the C.O. No. 13(Asr)/2012 filed in I.T.A. No.72 (Asr)/2012....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... first appellate authority in the impugned order held that the Assessing Officer has accepted the B/fd figure of Input Tax Credit (VAT prepared) Rs. 91,516.43/- as per the Audited Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2006 filed at the time of assessment proceedings. The above amount was outstanding in the Input Tax Credit A/c after the adjustment of Input Tax Credit & Output Tax Credit at the time of finalization & audit of books of account of the financial year 2005-06. The Assessing Officer has ignored the outstanding balance of Rs. 2,88,171.59/- as on 01.04.2006 in the Input Tax Credit A/c while estimating the purchases of Rs. 75,91,125/- for the period of 01.04.2006 to 24.08.2006 by applying VAT @ 4% on the balance of I.T.C. of Rs. 3,03,645/- as p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ount. Finally, the learned first appellate authority has rightly deleted the addition of Rs. 27,32,912/- after appreciating the evidence produced by the assessee for the whole year in dispute. Thus, we find no infirmity in the impugned order on the deletion of addition in dispute and we uphold the impugned order on this very issue. 9. As regards to the addition of Rs. 1,44,750/- made on account of disallowance of bad debts as claimed by the assessee, learned first appellate authority has rightly observed that the assessee-firm has sold goods to M/s Raaga International, Tarn Taran Road, Amritsar in May, 2004 by three bills for total amount of Rs. 1,82,250/-. Only one payment of Rs. 37,500/- was received during the financial year 2004-05 and....