TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 901
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....AC/2019-20/10178323 u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ["the Act"] arising out of assessment order dated 13.09.2022 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is a partnership firm, filed its return of income on 12.01.2021, declaring income of INR 1,17,490/-. The assessee is engaged in the business of liquor trading and case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS. During the course of assessment proceedings, various notices were issued for filing the details and assessee had filed part details on few occasions. After considering the details filed by assessee, AO observed that assessee firm has received cash from one Shri Rajnish Panwar on thr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 12.03.2024, has partly allowed the appeal of the assessee wherein the addition of INR 30 Lakhs was directed to be deleted after verification of claim regarding source in the hands of Shri Rajnish Panwar and addition made towards purchase of INR 1,16,12,999/- was directed to be deleted after verification of the same of from 26AS statement and delete the addition of INR 56,95,000/- made towards the payment of tax made to Excise department. 4. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal by taking following grounds of appeal:- 1. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 30,00,000/- made by the AO ignoring the fact that neith....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the confirmation of the addition made by the AO. 8. On the other hand, Ld.AR for the assessee vehemently supported the order of Ld.CIT(A) and submits that Ld.CIT(A) has directed the AO to verify the bank statements of Firm M/s. Atma Ram Pawar & Co. from where the payment was withdrawn by Shri Rajnish Panwar and deposited with the assessee firm. He further submits that AO had verified the bank statements and deleted the said addition in terms of the order passed u/s 250/154 of the Act dated 04.04.2024 therefore, there is no occasion with the Revenue to challenge this addition before the Tribunal. 9. Heard the contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. At the outset, from the perusal of the order passe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of M/s. Atma Ram Panwar & Co, which shows the credit of above amounts. As the amount of Rs. 30 lakhs has been received from the banks, the genuineness of the credit has been proved. However, the AO directed to verify the same from the bank account statements and delete the addition so made. The bank statements have been examined and these transactions are reflecting. Hence, the addition is deleted." 10. Since the issue has already been examined and accepted by the AO in set aside proceedings where AO has deleted the addition after verification from bank account therefore, there remained no issue to be challenged by the Revenue before us. Accordingly, Ground of appeal No.1 raised by the Revenue is dismissed. 11. Ground of appe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd the same can be verified from Form No.26AS which was filed with the AO. It is seen from the assessment order that the issued notice u/s. 133(6) of the Act to the above two entities for confirmation of purchases made by the appellant. No reply was received from the above two entities with regard to purchases made by the appellant. The appellant in the submissions submitted that it had made purchases from government approved vendors and the vendors duly collected TCS @ 1% under section 206C on entire purchases which was reflected in 26AS of the appellant. The appellant further furnished full details of M/s. Shivin Liquor LLP and Shri Sudhir Sharma, viz PAN, contact number, mail id and full address. It can be stated that the appellant has s....