TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (6) TMI 444
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....;) by treating purchases as bogus purchases on account of (i) difference in balances of creditors amounting to Rs. 11,28,265 (ii) non receipt of reply from creditor parties amounting to Rs. 93,48,549. 2. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the Appellant has neither furnished any inaccurate particulars nor concealed any particulars of income. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in completing the assessment on the basis of conjecture, mere suspicion and summarizing without any material or basis and by ignoring the relevant materials placed on records by the appellant in support of its submissions and therefore, the Appellant prays that addition of Rs. 1,04,76,814 may be deleted. 4. The learned DCIT erred in making appellant responsi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se of hearing, the assessee company was asked to produce confirmations in respect of transactions entered into by the assessee with number of parties. After perusal of the confirmations submitted and the details of purchases and other transactions made, it is found that the assessee company failed to submit the confirmations in respect of following parties :- S. No Name of the Party Nature of transaction Amounts (Rs.) 1. Online Infotainment Distributor's commission & expenses 24,00,339/- 2. Mega Infotainment Distributor's Commission 34,76,407/- 3. Net Magic Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Professional fees paid 33,27,803/- 4. PAN India Network Infravest Pvt. Ltd Purchase of Lotteries 70,92,698/- 5. Microtek International P.Ltd. P....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 5. Microtek Internnationl P. Ltd. Purchase of computers 2,40,000 No reply received 2,40,000 1,44,000 (on account of depreciation). 6. CMC Ltd. Purchase of computers 30,81,148 No reply received. 30,81,148 18,48,689(on account of depreciation). Proposed Addition 1,01,65,203/- The assessee was intimated about the same and was asked to substantiate that the transaction entered into with the above parties were genuine. The assessee was further asked to reconcile the discrepancy in the case of purchase of lotteries from M/s. PAN India Network Infravest Pvt. Ltd. In response to the same, the assessee stated that it is unable to produce the confirmations from the above parties. However, the assessee company submit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....into with the above parties is not a small amount. The assessee has no plausible reason for not substantiating the genuineness of the above mentioned transactions by way of confirmations. In view of the same, the claim of expenses and depreciation on the purchase of computers purchased from above-mentioned parties is not found to be genuine. Therefore, it is treated as expenditure not laid out or expended wholly & exclusively for the purpose of business and accordingly, the same is disallowed u/s.37(1) of the I.T. Act. Penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act are initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, thereby concealment of income chargeable to tax." 4. Upon assessee's appeal Ld. CIT-A held as under....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,407/-, Rs. 33,27,803/-, Rs. 1,44,000/- respectively are confirmed. M/s PAN India Network Infravest Pvt. Ltd. The appellant has failed to furnish reconciliation of Rs. 11,28,265/- and has failed to furnish any evidence that the amount pertain to TDS certification, hence, addition of Rs. 11,28,265/- is confirmed. M/s CMC Ltd. The AO in the remand report has stated that the confirmation of the party signed on 2010 supported by copies of Tax invoice have been filed therefore the assessee's claim regarding genuineness of transaction appears to be acceptable. In view of AO's report the addition of Rs. 18,48,689/- is deleted. 5. Against above order is in appeal before us. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. 6. We find that this case....