AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (12) TMI 1225
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Act by treating the purchase are genuine." 2. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id.CIT (A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 34,04,120/- - which was made by treating the sale of scrap as unaccounted sales." 3. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id.CfT (A) erred In deleting the addition of Rs. 66,8331- which was made on account of disallowance of expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income u/s 14A." 4. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id.CrT (A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 4,13,512/-which was made on account of disallowance of depreciation on capital addition made during the year." 5. "On the facts and in the ci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... findings of the Assessing officer regarding the non genuine purchase transactions made by the assessee" 2. The issue raised in the grounds of appeal no.1,5,6,7,8,9 and 10 is in respect of confirmation of addition of Rs. 1,37,875/- by the ld. CIT(A) as made by the AO by treating the same u/s 69C of the Act as unexplained expenditure. 3. The facts of the case in brief are that the AO received information from the DGIT(Inv), Mumbai and also from Sales Tax Department, Government of Maharashtra that the assessee has availed the entries of bogus purchases from M/s Siddhivinayak Steels to the tune of Rs. 1,37,875/- and accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the assessee calling upon to prove the genuineness of the said purchases, faili....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....evidences regarding movement of goods, delivery challan, transportation details and further corroborated by non-service of notice u/s 133(6) of the Act. Finally the AO came to the conclusion that the purchases were bogus and added the same to the total income of the assessee as unexplained expenditure. The ld. CIT(A) deleted the total addition on the basis that the expenditure cannot be treated as unexplained expenditure merely on the basis of the statement of Shri Promod Kumar Singh, Proprietor of M/s Siddhivinayak Steel recorded before the Sales Tax Department. Under the identical facts and circumstances case, we find that the coordinate benches of the Tribunal have been taking a consistent view while making sustaining the part addition r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aw relied upon by the assessee. The undisputed fact are that the AO made addition of scrap sales to the tune of Rs. 34,04,120/- being the difference between scrap sales value as has been incorporated by the AO in para 6.8 in the assessment order which is as under : Scrap sales 124.89 MT Sales shown by the assessee(excluding scrap sales) 4782.63 MT Sales (in Rs.) 22,61,88,526 Sale value per MT 47294 Sale value (scrap) 59,06,548 8. In the appellate proceedings, the ld.CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the AO on account of scrap sales by holding that the case of the assessee is covered by order of tribunal in assessment year 2009-10. 9. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material placed before us. We find from th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re that the AO disallowed a sum of Rs. 66,833/- under section 14A being interest of Rs. 60,083/- under rule 8D(2)(ii) and Rs. 6750/- under rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules by rejecting the submissions of the assessee that no expenditure was incurred in relation to earning of exempt income or making the investment which are of capable of earning exempt income. In the appellate proceedings, the ld.CIT(A) partly allowed ground raised by the assessee by directing the part deletion by holding that the assessee's own funds are sufficient to cover the investments in the tax free securities and investments therefore no disallowance was called for u/r 8D(2)(ii) to the tune of Rs. 60083/- and thus partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 12. We have h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that the similar treatment be given for this year also to which the ld.DR did not object. 15. On perusal of the Tribunal order relied upon by the assessee(supra), we find that the issue raised by the revenue stands covered against the revenue vide para 6 which is reproduced below: "6. The revenue has raised the issue of allowance of depreciation by the CIT(A) to the tune of Rs. 9,11,707/-. Before going further, it is necessary to advert the finding of the CIT(A) on record:- "7.3. I have carefully considered the submissions of the assessee and gone through the Profit & Loss Account and details of deprecation claimed and found that there is no reason to disallow the depreciation on the aforesaid additions made to fixed assets. Accordingly,....