TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 1245
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gold bar trading is a week time and ultimately the account was settled next year by return of such gold. 2) The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts in allowing purchase expenses of Rs. 4.57 crores by stating that such party M/s.N.K.Medallion Gold Ltd. was genuine although notice issued u/s.133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by Assessing Officer on such party was not replied by them. 3) The Id.CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the mandate of the Rule 46A(1) of the IT Rules, 1962 which debars the assessee to produce any evidence, whether oral or documentary, other than the evidence produced by him during the course of proceedings before the Assessing Officer, except in the circumstances enumerated in the clause (a) to (d) of the Rules 46A(1) of the IT Rules, 1962, and non availability of the same in the assessment proceedings, or/and its going to the very root of the matter to be decided upon by the Id. CIT(A) has not been contemplated by the legislature in the scheme of the Rules 46A(1) of the IT Rules, 1962. 4) The Id.CIT(A) has not appreciated that the assessee failed to discharge the primary onus cast upon her by section 37(1) of the IT Act, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., without explaining how two bills from same party are so different as well as without furnishing proof of gold transportation and delivery & without giving any reason as to how such purchases could be made by the assessee without making a single penny payment against it despite the fact that maximum credit allowed in gold bar trading is a week time and ultimately the account was settled next year by return of such gold. The Ld. DR further submitted that the CIT(A) erred in allowing purchase expenses of Rs. 4.57 crores by stating that such party M/s N. K. Medallion Gold Pvt. Ltd. were genuine although notice issued u/s 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by Assessing Officer on such party was not replied by them. The Ld. DR further submitted that the assessee failed to discharge the primary onus cast upon her by Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by proving with documentary evidence that the expenditure of Rs. 4,57,42,900/- claiming to have been made by the assessee to M/s N. K. Medallion Gold Pvt. Ltd. was genuinely incurred by the assessee wholly and exclusively for the purposes of assessee's business. The CIT(A) has not appreciated that the assessee's conduct in respect of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... not pointed out by the Revenue that the party was not in existence or the transaction was not genuine. In fact, on record, the party has filed confirmations and other relevant documents. Thus, the plea of the Ld. DR that the assessee failed to discharged its onus, does not survive. We find that the CIT(A) held as under:- "8.6 From the details furnished, it is seen that assessee purchased gold bar from N.K. Gold Medallion Pvt. Ltd. weighing 16,895.9 gms in F.Y. 2012-13 and sold the gold bar to M/s N.K. Gold Medallion Pvt. Ltd. weighing 16,335.7 gms through five bills in F.Y. 2013-14. Besides the above the appellant has filed the copy of the ID for the online return filed with Department of Trade and Taxes, Government of NCT of Delhi, dtd. 23.10.2012 and copy of the verification report of annexure 2A & 2B filed with the Department of Trade and Taxes on different dates in respect of sales to M/s N.K. Gold Medallion Pvt. Ltd. M/s N.K. Gold Medallion Pvt. Ltd. has confirmed the accounts of Swaran Traders for F.Y. 2013-14 in their books of account reflecting the aforesaid transactions. As per the trading and P&L a/c of Swaran Traders, the proprietorship concern of the assessee ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....taken by his predecessor who made this addition. The appellant has relied on the judgment of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Eland International Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (2009) 20 DTR Del (Trib) 113, wherein it was held that if sales have been affected out of the purchases made from the parties, which did not confirm the transactions on serving of notices u/s 133(6), it cannot be said that the purchases were bogus. The appellant has further relied on the judgment of Jaipur Bench of Income Tax Tribunal in the case of Shubh laxmi Export Vs ITO 10 DTR 281 in which it was held that no addition for bogus purchases u/s 69 C could made for doubting physical delivery of purchases made. "8.9 I have carefully considered the facts of the case, evidences on the Record and the submission of the appellant. With all the details and evidences produced before the Assessing Officer and mentioned supra, the identity of M/s N.K. Gold Medallion Pvt. Ltd. cannot be doubted. Further the impugned transaction is supported by several independent documents in the form of purchase invoices, levy of VAT, deposit of VAT, transaction recorded in the books of account of both ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hri Siddharth Gupta, the Director of the lender company filed memorandum and articles of association and copy of income tax return. This is one of the companies in which Mrs. Rekha Gupta is one of the Directors. The other Directors are family members. She was having dispute with her son. The dispute was pending in Company Law Board. There was no business in this company since 2011. Due to this dispute, requisite papers like balance sheet etc. were not filed with the Registrar of companies and income tax department. As regards, the source of the amounts received, the company had sold a property of the company for Rs. 12,15,000/-, out of which Rs. 10,00,000/- was received in the bank before days of the transaction with the assessee. The copy of the sale deed is attached. Out of the same sum Rs. 9,80,000/- was transferred to Mrs. Rekha Gupta for which copy of the bank statement is enclosed. In regard to the loan amounting to Rs. 11,45,000/- from M/s Anant Shree Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., the appellant has submitted that the Director of this company has mentioned about this loan to Rekha Gupta. Mr. Siddharth Gupta, the Director of this company filed memorandum and articles ....