2022 (12) TMI 1090

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e it arising out of assessment order dated 18.12.2018 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') passed by Sh. Jai Pal Singh, Circle-3(2)1, MZR (hereinafter referred as Ld. Assessing officer or in short Ld. AO). 2. The brief facts of the case are that assessee company had filed its Return of Income for assessment year 2016-17 on 07.09.2016 declaring income of Rs. 1,16,45,130/-. Later on, the case of the assessee company was selected for scrutiny and assessment was completed u/s 143(3) on 18.12.2018. 2.1 The case of Revenue is that during the course of assessment proceedings the assessee company was specifically asked to furnish confirmation of the trade payables above one lakh. Despite a long sequence of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... his onus of proving the capacity of the creditors and genuineness of the transactions. In opinion of Ld. FAA, the Assessing Officer has not appreciated the facts of the case in its entirety. This is a case, where the books are not out rightly rejected, there is no adverse inference drawn regarding quantum of purchases or sales and even the purchase accounts of the sundry creditors have not been disturbed. The fact that the assessee maintained regular books of account including stock register is also not negated. The Assessing Officer had not disallowed the purchases from those creditors nor were the trading results disturbed. Ld. FAA relied, CIT vs. Ritu Anurag Aggarwai-IT Appeal No. 325 of 2008 dated 22/07/2009, dealing with section 68 of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts by deleting the addition of Rs. 3,41,56,172/- made by the AO on account of trade payables by not appreciating the fact that though the assessee had provided a list of 46 parties with trade credit balances totaling Rs. 18,19,33,614/-, in 4 lots and has failed to file confirmations in respect of the balance 114 parties involving total credit balance of Rs. 3,17,04,143/- till the date of assessment order. 2. The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts by deleting the addition of Rs. 3,97,586/- made by the AO on account of advance from customers by not appreciating the fact that the assessee did nto file any cross-confirmation at all from the 6 parties involved." 4. Heard and perused the record. 5. As the....