2018 (2) TMI 46

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the AO u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), dated 25.03.2014. 2.The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: "1.For that the Ld. Appellate erred on fact and laws by confirming the estimation of Rs. 95,654/- which is baseless and on surmise. 2.For that method of determination of undisclosed purchase by Ld. A.O. by applying disclosed G.P. rate of appellant is incorrect and wrong. 3.For that confirmation of addition of Rs. 30,75,702/- by the appellate authority is unjust and cryptic since the Appellant reconciled the purchase differences in the proper manner both in Assessment as well as in remand stage which is mainly non-inclusion of input VAT and allied item....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (i).During the assessment proceedings, the AO noted that the assessee in his accounts input VAT and Output VAT had not entered. Only on entry as "lnput Credit for the F.Y.10-11" of Rs. 36,853.04 was entered in Balance Sheet. From that entry in balance sheet, it was not clear about the total amount of lnput and Output VAT and also the assessee has not furnished any other documentary evidences, i.e., Sales Tax Return or any other documents, which can prove total input and output VAT. The total amount of Rs. 30,17,341/- was treated by AO as difference from M/s Bengal Beverage Pvt. Ltd. (ii) M/s Global Aqua Pvt. Ltd.: Total amount of net purchase confirmed by the company of Rs. 4,02,478/-, but net purchase in respect ofM/s Global Aqu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....see filed an appeal before the ld.CIT(A) who has confirmed the addition made by assessing officer. The ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessee has stated nothing more than to assert that he had explained all the differences of accounts between the various parties. The CIT(A) also noted that the fact of the matter was that despite several opportunities, the appellant did not provide supporting material for his contentions on VAT. There were no details of sales tax provided which would have served as an independent corroborative piece of evidence to support the contentions of the assessee. It may be observed that the appellant has nowhere tried to explain the circumstances or conditions due to which he could not produce the supporting evidence.....