TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (9) TMI 171
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....risdiction, both are contrary to the provisions of law and facts on record. Hence, the proceedings initiated u/s 263 of the Act and the impugned order dated 10.12.2014 kindly be quashed. (3) The ld. CIT, Alwar erred in law as well as on the fact of the case in ignoring the various facts, submissions and the evidences submitted before the AO as also before him with regard to issues under consideration which being contrary to the provisions of law, hence the impugned order kindly be quashed. (4) The ld. CIT, Alwar erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in setting-aside the assessment order dated 31.12.2012 with reference to all the following issues :- (i) Regarding payment of commission of Rs. 4,18,644/- to M/s. Pipes Centre, Madurai. (ii) Regarding the quantitative details of stock. (iii) Regarding advance of Rs. 2,50,000/- given to Shri Jagdish Meena. (iv) Regarding bank charges of Rs. 8,363.50. Merely on suspicion, surmise & conjunctures and in wrongly alleging lack of proper enquiry and non-application of mind by the AO which is nothing but a pretence. The impugned order therefore lacks valid jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act and hence, the impugned o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it is found at 2,85,679.89 quintals. Thus weight-wise purchase has been shown less by 24,637.14 quintals. Similarly, the total sales (in weight) had been shown at 2,80,607.98 quintals but after totaling month-wise, it was found at 2,80,759 quintals. It was further noticed by the ld. CIT that average purchase price for the month of January, 2010 and March, 2010 it comes to Rs. 1521.04 per quintal. If the same weight is added to total purchase weight then the total purchases will come to 2,86,010.69 quintals. Accordingly the closing stock will be 5251.14 quintals instead of 4916.34 quintals. Accordingly assessee has shown shortage of closing stock by 334.80 quintals which were sold by the assessee outside the books of account. If the rate for the purpose of closing stock is taken by purchase price of March, 2010, that the same is 1185.63 quintals. Accordingly the total difference comes to Rs. 3,96,948/-. Similarly as regards sales in weight, the assessee has shown the total sales at 2,80,607.98 quintals whereas the same is found to be at 2,80,759 quintals after month-wise totaling. The ld. A/R of the assessee tried to explain that this was the difference on account of weight of the g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has to be fulfilled by the ld. CIT in passing order under section 263 of the IT Act for which he relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. (supra) and CIT vs. Max India Ltd. (2007) 295 ITR 282 (SC). The AO completed the assessment under section 143(3) after making various enquiries and due investigation. The required information was filed by the ld. A/R before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings for which he drawn our attention on pages 1 to 3 i. E. questionnaire dated 09.10.2012 issued by the AO to the assessee. The AO asked the assessee to submit the details of opening and closing stock in quantity in item no 15, Dalali expenses in item no. 17, Commission expenses in item no.18 and Purchases/Sales in item no. 7, Interest payment and received during the year in item no. 12 of the questionnaire, which were submitted by the assessee vide her letters dated 29.11.2012, 13.12.2012, 21.12.2012. It is proved that the ld. AO made enquiry during the course of assessment proceedings. The ld. Counsel for the assessee had produced the books of accounts, stock register, purchase and sale expenses vouchers and various other deta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al contentions and perused the material on record. The ld. CIT considered five issues under section 263 i. E. commission payment, quantity of stocks, loan to Shri Jagdish Meena, Freight payment without TDS and Bank charges. He himself has not considered the freight charges adversely for treating the order erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. The issue no. 5 is bank charges paid of Rs. 8363/-. The amount is nominal and ld. AO has examined the details of bank reconciliation with bank charges. Therefore, on this point, we do not find the order of AO erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. But commission payment, quantitative details and interest issue had not been examined by the AO after calling the partial details and there is no application of mind before allowing the same. It is fact that assessee is a commission agent and wholesale general merchant of grains. However, the commission claimed to be paid to M/s. Rajesh Pipe Centre, Madurai who is dealing in MS, GI and PVC pipes. Further, in quantitative details, there was a discrepancy in assessment record which has not been verified by the AO during the assessment proceedings which is ....