TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 1053
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....partnership firm is engaged in wholesale business of all types of hardware industrial consumables. For the assessment year under dispute, the assessee filed its return of income on 26th November 2012, declaring nil income. During the assessment proceedings for verifying the sundry creditors, unsecured loans, etc., the Assessing Officer issued notices under section 133(6) of the Act on random basis. As observed by the Assessing Officer, from the reply received from Starflex Sealing India Pvt. Ltd., it was noticed that the balance outstanding in the name of the assessee in their books has been shown at Rs. 1,17,55,669, whereas in assessee's books, an amount of Rs. 29,74,632, appears as sundry creditors in the name of the said party along with....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....entative relied upon the observations of the Assessing Officer and the learned Commissioner (Appeals). 6. I have considered rival submissions and perused materials on record. The disputed addition of Rs. 1,97,388, has been made on account of the difference in outstanding balance shown in the books of the assessee as well as Starflex Sealing India Pvt. Ltd. The fact that there is a difference in the figures is undisputed considering the information obtained under section 133(6) of the Act from Starflex Sealing India Pvt. Ltd. during the assessment proceedings. However, it appears that though the assessee has made submissions before the Assessing Officer reconciling the difference, it has not be properly considered. The learned Commissione....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e has shown gross profit rate of 67%. Therefore, only because the notices issued under section 133(6) of the Act returned unserved, purchases made cannot be disallowed. 11. The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the observations f the Departmental Authorities. 12. I have considered rival submissions and perused materials on record. It appears from the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has made the addition primarily for the reason that the notices issued under section 133(6) of the Act could not be served on the concerned parties. Of-course, he has also observed that the assessee failed to produce the concerned parties before him. However, it appears from the record that the assessee has furnished quantitative tally....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....llowance of Rs. 10,000. 16. In ground no.4, assessee has challenged disallowance of set-off of brought forward of business loss of Rs. 6,28,304 relating to assessment year 2003-04. 17. The learned Authorised Representative submitted that in the computation of income for the impugned assessment year, the assessee has claimed carry forward of business loss of Rs. 6,28,304. He submitted that the aforesaid claim of assessee was not only ignored by the Assessing Officer but also by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). He submitted that even though the assessee has filed a rectification application before the Assessing Officer way back on 29th March 2013, it is still pending. Thus, he submitted that necessary directions may be issued to the ....