TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (1) TMI 406
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,00,000/-made u/s 68 and disallowance of interest expenses on that of Rs. 52,142/- without appreciating the fact that the assessee failed to prove the identity and genuineness of the transaction with sufficient documents and the information/signature of the lender party given were different. [3] On the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 37,35,148/- made on account of excess shortage without appreciating the fact that the assessee did not submit bill wise shortage to prove its claim and the sale price should have been higher if the shortage is higher, which is not in the assessee's case. [4] On the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 3,78,690/- made u/s 69B for stock difference in spite of the fact that there was a huge difference between book stock and the stock given to the Bank, which the assessee was not able to explain satisfactorily. [5] On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. [6] It is, therefore, prayed that the order o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....orted the order of the ld.CIT(A) and submitted that the AO erred in making disallowance and the ld.CIT(A) has rightly given a finding on fact that the assessee has proved the payments of commission which were paid through banking channel and TDS of such payments has been deducted as per law. 4. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the ld.CIT(A) has given finding on fact in para-2.3 of his order by observing as under:- "2.3. ... . All these grounds taken by AO are very flimsy and superficial grounds. Without making any investigation or without identifying any defect in the books of account and bills or vouchers, conclusion drawn by AO cannot be held justified. The appellant has perfectly explained with proper reasons that why the commission expenses in the month of March in comparison to other months of year are high. All the relevant details, supported with documentary evidences have been filed by appellant before AO but not a single significant defect has been detected by AO. The details of sales made by agents, method of payments through account payee cheques in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessed and has shown total income around R.5 lakhs for the year under consideration. The AO could have easily examined the facts related to creditor from the records of his own Range. As per submission of appellant, all these details and documentary evidences clearly prove the genuineness of loan. In support of its submission, app0 has relied on a large number of judgments of different courts as mentioned in the submission. In view of the above, appellant pleaded to delete the addition. 3.3. I have considered the facts on the issue and legal position on it. In this ground also, AO has given very superficial reasons to treat the loan as unexplained. The facts related to address, signature, etc. could have easily verified by him from the record of his own office were appellant as well as creditor both are assessed. He has not been able to find any defect or ingenuineness in the evidences given by appellant which prove the identity of the creditor, capacity of providing loan and genuineness of transaction. Identity and capacity of the creditor is proved by return of income filed and genuineness of transaction is also proved by filing the bank statement which reflect that paym....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ra-4.3 of his order by observing as under:- "4.3 I have considered the facts of the case and found that as earlier two additions, this addition is also made by AO on very weak grounds. The basis given by AO for making disallowance that shortage of goods on account of job workers is not an acceptable theory, higher shortage leads to higher sale price of finished goods and only sample bills were produced by appellant, are again superficial and flimsy grounds. As per chart given in the submissions, appellant has shown better results in the form of turnover, gross profit and net profit in comparison to earlier year. The books of account maintained by appellant have not been rejected and accepted by AO as complete and without any error. No defects have been pointed out by AO in those books of account. In plethora of judgments, different courts and tribunals have held that unless the books of account of assessee are rejected, no estimation can be made. The normal shortage worked out by AO from 15% to 17% in this line of business is based on which details is not made clear by AO. Such details are not confronted to appellant which is clearly violation of natural justice. Why only ....