TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (4) TMI 848
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....profit and loss ac submitted to the department and the same submitted to the assessee' banker. 2. That the CIT(A) erred in law and on the facts of the case in deleting the addition of Rs. 3,87,502/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of expenses due to non deduction of TDS on them. 3. (a) The order of the CIT(A) is erroneous and not tenable in law and on facts. (b) The appellant craves to add, alter or amend any/all of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal. " 2. At the outset, none appeared before us on behalf of the assessee nor any request for adjournment has been filed. Considering the nature of issues, the Bench decided to dispose of the appeal ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... statements to bankers were submitted only for broken periods viz. 1.12.2006 to 23.1.2007;1.1.2007 to 10.2.2007;11.2.2007 & March, 2007, concluded as under:- "4.4 I have carefully gone through the assessment order, the written submission of the appellant as well as the remand report, the rejoinder to the remand report as well as the assessment record which was requisitioned during the course of hearing in order to verify the contentions of the appellant. On perusal of the assessment record it is evident that after collection of the information from bank, no opportunity was given to the appellant for explaining the discrepancies. It is also seen that the assessee has responded to the query of Assessing Officer for reconciliation dat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as under: Sales Reconciliation S. No. Date of which submission of statement to banker Period taken in statement submitted to banker Sales value as per statement submitted to banker [In Rs. ] Sales amount as per books of accounts [In Rs. ] Difference amount after reducing [In Rs. ] Reasons for difference\ [In Rs. ] 1 24.1.07 1.12.06 to 31.12.06 1.1.07 to 23.1.07 51,06,252 22,87,601 19,76,201 8,42,450 1. Excise duty amount 682208 and Vat amt. 198386 wrongly included in sale while submitting to banker in the bank statement (682208+198386=880594) ledger account enclosed. 2. Minor error of Rs. 38144 by accountant in statements submitted to banker. 2 12.2.07 1.1.07 to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e have heard the ld. DR and gone through the facts of the case. We find that the ld. CIT(A) after considering the findings of the AO in the remand report on additional evidence submitted by the assessee and facts available on assessment records and reconciliation of sales submitted by the assessee during the remand proceedings, concluded that sales and purchases stood reconciled and, therefore, addition was without any basis. Since the ld. DR appearing before us did not refer us to take any material controverting the aforesaid findings of facts recorded by the ld. CIT(A) so as to enable us to take a different view in the matter, we have no basis to interfere. Consequently, ground no.1 in the appeal is dismissed. 7. Ground no.2 in the app....