2011 (11) TMI 752

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....580/- since the creditors we4e not verified and remained unexplained. 2. The Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of ` 2,45,594/-. 3. The order of Ld. CIT(A) be set aside and the order of the A.O. be restored." 3. The brief facts of the case in ground no.1 are that the assessee has declared the following sundry creditors as at the end of the year relevant to the Assessment Year 2007-08 :- i) M/s. Krishna Traders ` 20,99,736/- ii) M/s. Chadda Brothers ` 3,00,000/- iii) M/s. Chaatwal Metals ` 1,05,000/- iv) M/s. Raman Enterprises ` 13,75,653/- 4. The assessee during the assessment proceedings produced copy of accounts, confirmation, PAN and names an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt in the relevant years. Also outstanding liability of the sundry creditors cannot be held 50% as bogus and remaining as genuine which is against the principles of law. 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the facts of the case. We are convinced with the arguments made by Shri Vinod Goyal, Advocate, the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the sundry creditors outstanding as at the end of the year relevant to the impugned Assessment Year are old creditors and therefore, they cannot be the subject matter of addition u/s. 68 of the Act during the impugned year. Moreover, the sundry creditors having been accepted by the Department in the earlier year is not under dispute. Moreover, it is quite illogical to make a disallowance of....