TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (2) TMI 253
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....S data and its P&L account. 2. The assessee submitted reconciliation between receipts in Form 26AS and corresponding revenue recorded as per P&L account with respect to three sample parties since the number of transactions and their related documents were voluminous. The Assessing Officer disregarded the submissions of the assessee, and vide order sheet entry dated 11.12.2017 show caused the assessee as to why addition should not be made on account of difference of receipts appearing in Form 26AS and revenue disclosed in P&L account for the relevant assessment year. Date of compliance to file all submissions and documents for the assessee was the very next day i.e. - 12.12.2017. Since the submissions and documents were voluminous in nature and time given was too short and since the assessee could not comply with show cause of the Assessing Officer, he added difference of receipt shown in 26AS and P&L account amounting to Rs. 4,78,93,068/- to the total income of the assessee. 3. The Assessing Officer also issued a demand notice u/s 156 of the Act raising the demand of Rs. 2,07,49,030/-. 4. During the arguments of the stay application against the recovery, it was broug....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ipt shown in Form 26 AS and financials/return of income, and hence the same is liable to be deleted. 6. That, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the AO/CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the business model of the Assessee and the accounting method adopted by it. 7. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the AO/CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the favourable assessment order passed in Assessee's own case pertaining to AY 2014-15 and AY 2016-17, which is based on identical facts and wherein the business model and accounting method of the Assessee stands accepted. 8. That, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has grossly erred in law in rejecting the application for additional evidence of the Assessee under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 ('the Rules'). 9. That, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the AO has erred in passing the impugned assessment order without giving the Assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard and the same is in clear violation of principles of natural justice. 10. That, without prejudice, the addition made is unjust, illegal, bad in la....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urred by the assessee on behalf of its client and reimbursement received from them. S No. Particulars Volume No. Page No. 1. Invoices raised by assessee company to its clients 1-9 1-4505 2. Bills/ledgers being submitted in support of reimbursable components Encl.: 1. Bills of dock/AAl charges incurred by assessee 2. Bills of delivery order (DO) charges incurred by assessed 3. Challan of Custom Duty 4. Bills of transportation expenses incurred by assessee 5. Bills of freight expenses incurred by assessee 10-14 15-16 17-18 19-20 21 4506-7278 7279-8085 8086-8832 8833-9411 9412-9504 10. The assessee has submitted the reconciliation of income in the P&L account vis-à-vis the invoices raised. Particulars Amount Amount Formula TOTAL INVOICE VALUE 488,145,306 A INVOICE OF PREVIOUS YEAR 167,910 B TOTAL INVOICE OF CURRENT YEAR 437,977,396 C= A-B LESS: CUSTOM DUTY 405,906,684 D DOCK CHARGES 12,732,470 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... LOSS A/C 16,209,806 N=C-M 11. Further, the assessee submitted that even as per the service tax return which consisted of transportation, loading expenses and agency commission, the service tax has been levied only on the components which are not reimbursements. The assessee has also reconciled the differences between receipts shown in the service tax return and revenues from operations. 12. Further, it was submitted that the assessee has been consistently following such method of accounting and the same has been duly accepted by the department as well. The details for the earlier and subsequent years are as under: Assessment Year Receipts as per Form 26AS Revenue as per books AY 2014-15 6,37,09,595/- 1,58,93,920/- AY 2016-17 6,66,32,3317- 2,59,41,417/- 13. The additional evidences filed before the ld. CIT (A) were remanded to the Assessing Officer and the Assessing Officer technically refused to accept the additional evidences (para 3.4 of the CIT(A)), he has examined the matter on merits and submitted that "it is observed from the reconciliation furnished by the assessee company, it is observed that amount of Rs. 6,5....