TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 131
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....late proceedings, has failed to establish that the seller used to supply materials vide challans on different dates, but made invoices on the last date of the month? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld CIT(A) was justified in accepting the submissions of the assessee that as the materials purchased from the supplier from Udaipur was sold to M/s GV India Pvt. Ltd., the same cannot be shown as closing stock, inspite of the fact that the assessee's above contention was without any corroborative evidences to prove the same? 3. On the basis of the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. It is therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) may be set aside and that of assessing officer may be restored. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw any ground(s) of appeal either before or during the course of hearing of the appeal." 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is the proprietor of 'Om Construction', engaged in Civil Construction and job work filed his return of income for the Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11 on 25/09/2010 declari....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the validity of reopening as well as addition/disallowance on merit. On the merit of addition, the assessee submitted that the assessee was working as a sub-contractor of GHV India Private Limited. GHV India Private Limited was awarded the contract from Airport Authority of India for development (construction) of Airport at Udaipur. GHV India Private limited had given sub contract to the assessee to carry out construction work at site and to furnish bills and challans to GHV India Private Limited. The assessee as per contract executed civil work at Udaipur and submitted bills and challans to GHV Private Limited, who in turn submitted to Airport Authority and thereafter payment is released to GHV India Private Limited and thereafter, GHV India Private Limited released/ reimbursed to assessee. In the month of March, 2010, the assessee purchased gitty from Charbhuja Crushing Plant, Udaipur which was supplied through various challans on different days in the month of March, 2010. The bills were raised separately for each challan on last day/single day on 31/3/2010 by supplier. Thus, it was not a case that entire purchases were made only on 31/3/2010. Material was received on various da....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... The ld. CIT(A) observed that during the reassessment, the assessee filed his reply/letter dated 14/3/2016 wherein it was explained that Charbhuja Crushing plant, Udaipur supplied the material (gitty) through challans on different dates but invoices were raised on last date of month and it was explained that due to that reason, the material produced from party were shown in the ledger account on 31/3/2010. It was also explained that the assessee raised bill for the said material on GHV India Private Limited and the same was included in the sales figure. And it cannot be shown as closing stock. The ld. CIT(A) further noted that the Assessing Officer failed to give any reason to reject the submission of assessee rather recoded that the assessee failed to establish as to why goods in transit were not shown in closing stock or work in progress. The ld. CIT(A) further noted that when the assessee explained that the material was supplied through different challans on different dates and supplier raised bill on the last date of month, the Assessing Officer ought to have made relevant enquiry from the supplier. The observation of Assessing Officer that transaction taken place as on 31/3/2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....judication of validity of issuing of notice under Section 148 became academic. Aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(A), the Revenue has filed the present appeal before this Tribunal. 8. We have heard the submissions of learned Senior Departmental Representative of the Revenue (ld. Sr. DR) and the learned authorised representative (ld. AR) of the assessee and have also perused the orders of the lower authorities carefully. The ld. Sr. DR for the revenue submits that the assessee has shown purchases of material from Udaipur on the last day of financial year. It is not possible to transport the goods from Udaipur. The assessee is following mercantile system of accounting, the assessee should have shown the cost of material in its closing stock or in work in progress. The ld. Sr. DR on his submission supported the order of Assessing Officer. 9. On the other hand, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that before the Assessing Officer, the assessee has filed reply on 14/3/2016. The assessee in its reply explained that GHV India Private Limited was awarded a contract for development/construction of Airport at Udaipur. GHV India Private Ltd. sublet/assigned /sub contracted work to the assesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat the assessee in its reply to the Assessing Officer filed on 14/3/2016, duly acknowledged by the office of ITA Ward 3(2)(2), Surat explaining that the assessee is sub-contractor with GHV India Private Limited. The Assessing officer instead of considering the contents of reply of assessee straightway held that the assessee failed to establish whey the goods in transit was not shown in work in progress or closing stock. We find that before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee reiterated the similar submission as has already been submitted before the Assessing Officer. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of assessee held that the assessee raised bill for the said material on GHV India Private Limited and the same was included in the sales figure. It cannot be shown as closing stock. The ld. CIT(A) further held that the Assessing Officer failed to give any reason to reject the submission of assessee rather recorded that the assessee failed to establish as to why goods in transit were not shown in closing stock or work in progress. The ld. CIT(A) also held that when the assessee explained that the material was supplied through different challans on different days and supplier ra....