2018 (8) TMI 666

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s (Rs. 9,45,200/-) and M/s Madhav Krishna Jewellers (Rs. 9,85,014/-) as non-genuine by not appreciating the various evidences filed by the assessee in support of the genuineness of creditors." 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the trading of Gems & Jewellery under his proprietor concern M/s Vikas Exports. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer on perusal of the audited balance sheet of the assessee for A.Y. 2013-14 noticed certain sundry creditors and in order to verify the same, the assessee was asked to submit postal addresses of the sundry creditors. The AO issued notices under section 133(6) to various creditors, however, in respect of M/s Madhav Krishna Jewellers and M/s ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re genuine, how can the credit balances lying in the account of sundry creditors been genuine when the credit in the account has flown from the same purchase bills which were found to be genuine. It may be mentioned that if the purchases are accepted by the AO, it does not mean that the sundry creditors stands proved automatically. It has already been mentioned earlier that the result of enquiries made by the AO including the spot verification was confronted by the AO to the appellant but the appellant could not prove the genuineness of these sundry creditors. It is to be noted that from the profit and loss account of the appellant for the year under consideration, that during the year declaration it has made purchases to the tune of Rs. 49....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r by ignoring the following evidences which proves the genuineness of purchases made from these two parties:- (a) Copy of the purchase bill which contains their TIN/ PAN and also the complete address. These purchases were made on 04.02.2013 & 02.02.2013, i.e. just before end of the year and therefore, amount were outstanding at the end of the year. (b) Copy of the certificate of registration given by Commercial Tax Department to these two parties. (c) Confirmation given by these parties. The confirmation was filed with the AO on 15.12.2015. (d) Copy of PAN card of the proprietor of these concerns wherein their permanent address is mentioned. (e) Payment to both the parties is made by account payee cheque on 31.10.2013 as mentioned....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... referred above, the genuineness of the purchases is fully established. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has also furnished the evidence that the goods purchased through these bills has been exported. However, even after providing all these evidences, the Ld. CIT(A) has not at all commented or given any adverse finding in respect of the documents produced by the assessee. Thus, the addition made by the AO and confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) is only on surmises & conjectures and without appreciating the material available on record in a correct perspective. 4.4 In support, the reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of PCIT Vs. Tejua Rohitkumar Kapadia (in Tax Appeal No. 691 of 2017 order dt. 18.09.2017)....