2018 (9) TMI 1681

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t, filed his return for Assessment Year 2012-13 on 28.09.2012 declaring income of Rs. 37,100. The return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') and the case was subsequently taken up for scrutiny in the year under consideration. The assessment was concluded under Section 143(3) of the Act vide order dt.313.2015, wherein the assessee's income was determined at Rs. 16,82,287 in view of the following additions / disallowances :- i) Difference in purchases Rs.53,249. ii) Disallowance u/s.40A(3) Rs.6,28,500. iii) Disallowance of URD Jowar Purchases Rs.10,00,538.   2.2 Aggrieved by the order of assessment for Assessment Year 2012- 13, the assessee prefe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....It is prayed that since the above disallowance by the Assessing Officer is not in keeping with accounting principles, the disallowance is to be deleted. 5.3 Per contra, the learned Departmental Representative for Revenue supported the orders of the authorities below. 5.4.1 We have heard the rival contentions, perused and carefully considered the material on record. In the order of assessment, the Assessing Officer while making he said disallowance of Rs. 10,00,538 on account of bogus purchases of jowar at para 5.1 thereof has held as under :- 5.4.2 From a perusal of the finding rendered by the Assessing Officer at para 5.1 of the order of assessment (supra), we find that the case of the Assessing Officer is that on examination of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....icer erred in law and on facts in making disallowance of Rs. 10,00,538/- on the basis of the payments towards purchase of jowar being bogus, as the same were not shown as purchases in the trading, profit and loss account. 3. Without prejudice to the above, merely because the assessee had classified jowar purchases as maize purchases, being a nomenclature issue, the learned Assessing Officer erred in law and on facts making disallowance of Rs. 10,00,538/ on the basis of the payments towards purchases of jowar were bogus, despite showing the relevant entries in the books of accounts.. 4. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter vary and / or withdraw any or all the above grounds of Appeal. Document 2 5.1....