TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (3) TMI 965
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ri Avikesh Banerjee and Mrs. Saswati Mitra (Dutta), Ld. Advocate appeared on behalf of assessee and Shri M.K. Chandra, Ld. Departmental Representative represented on behalf of Revenue. 2. At the outset, it is observed that there is a delay of 10 days on the part of the assessee in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application seeking condonation of the said delay and keeping in view the reasons given therein, which is duly supported by an affidavit filed by the assessee. we are of the view that there is a sufficient cause for the delay on the part of the assessee in filing this appeal. Hence, we condone the said delay and proceed to dispose of this appeal of the assessee on merit. 3. The ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1,58,620 5. Sri Subrata Das 1,64,800 6. Sri Asthik Bauri 1,26,500 7. Sri Abni Bauri 1,32,600 8. Sri Shakti Pada Chatterjee 1,57,630 9. Sri Chandi Bauri 1,25,900 10. Sri Netai Maji 1,20,960 11. Sri Satya Prakash Cheel 2,46,500 12. Sri Samar Chakraborti 1,42,500 13. Sri Shyama Pada Bauri 1,62,800 14. Sri rajib Banerjee 1,41,000 Total 21,38,100 The Assessing Officer, during the course of assessment proceedings issued notice to all the aforesaid parties u/s 133(6) of the Act to verify the genuineness of the transactions. Notices were served to the parties except the party appearing at sl. No.14 i.e. Shri Rajib Banerjee. Notice was returned back by the postal authorities as unserved with the rem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ld. CIT(A) submitted that many parties did not appear before the AO out of their fear and they were apprehending some consequences against themselves. The AO should have issued notices and reminders one more time. The AO should have also conducted such inquiry in order to ascertain the genuineness of the transactions. The assessee also submitted that all the parties are located in a very small place and they do not maintain all the records properly and systematically. However, the ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee had given relief in part by observing as under :- "6. I had considered the comments of applicant submitted during hearing on 04.06.2013. It is on certain practical difficulties in proving transactions.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....held. No relief is due to the appellant. With the above direction grounds 1, 2 and 3 are disposed of." Being aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(A) the assessee is in second appeal before us. 7. The ld. AR before us filed a paper book and other details which are running from pages 1 to 68 and he submitted that the place of business of the assessee is located at Raghunathpur, Purulia which was totally devastated by most naxual. Therefore the customers of the assessee could not provide all the details as desired by the lower authorities. The ld. AR further submitted that the parties from whom the advances were received have been billed in the subsequent financial year. In support of his claim the ld. AR drew our attention on pages 22 to 68....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pies of the ledgers in respect of all the parties which are placed on record. Once the assessee is able to show the source against the advances received in the earlier years then the same cannot be treated as unexplained. In the case on hand the assessee has discharged his burden by giving necessary details of the parties from whom the advances was received and sales made to those parties. The ld. DR has not brought anything contrary to the submissions made by the ld. AR. In view of the above we are of the view that the additions made by the lower authorities are not sustainable as the assessee has furnished the necessary details in support of the advances and the subsequent sales. While holding so, we also find support and guidance from th....