TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 1166
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l: 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 3,41,00,672/- made by the AO on account of unexplained expenses u/s. 37 of the Act and bogus purchases. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee by stating that the disallowance was made by the AO based only on the retracted statement of Shri Pradip Udeshi. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, to amend, alter/delete and/or modify the above grounds of appeal on or before the final hearing. 4. The appellant, therefore, prays that on the grounds(s) stated above, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) Mumbai, may be set aside and that of the assessing officer to be restored." 2. Brief facts of the case as gathered from the orders of lower authorities are that a search action was carried out by Investigation Wing in Mumbai on 30.09.2021 on the beneficiaries of Rajiv Saxena Group of companies/ Khatau Group and others wherein the assessee was also covered. Consequent upon search action and material gathered during the search action, the case of assessee was reopened under....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vided bogus purchase entry of Rs. 3.41 crores. In the reasons recorded, the assessing officer recorded that assessee - Cable Corporation of India has shown purchases of Rs. 3.41 crores from Odicee Carrier whish escaped from assessment. The assessing officer further recorded that in the search action at the office of assessee a draft forensic audit was found and seized. On perusal of draft audit it was found that Cable Corporation of India (assessee) during FY 2016-17 to 2019-20 made purchases from different parties but no lorry recipe or invoices or e-way bills were found by forensic audit team. The details of various purchases were scanned on page no. 7 & 8 of assessment order. 4. On the basis of such view the assessing officer issued show cause notice as to why undisclosed cash of Rs. 3.41 crore for AY 2018-19 should not be added to the income of the assessee. In reply, the assessee stated that in the show cause notice is based on draft forensic audit report which was seized during the search proceeding in the premises of assessee wherein the assessee has shown purchases from Electronic Appliances and Bhairav Metals of Rs. 52,50,000/- and Rs. 89,18,440/-. Such invoices were co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion. The statement of Pradip Udeshi is general in nature. All the submissions of assessee are recorded at page no. 4 to 18 of order of ld. CIT(A). 6. The ld. CIT(A) on considering the submission of assessee recorded that assessee furnished various evidences in support of its claim for genuineness of transaction of transportations. The assessing officer not accepted such document and relied upon the statement recorded during search action. The assessing officer has not doubted the sale shown by the assessee. Majority of finished goods is supplied to Tata Power Company Ltd. at their location at Govanpada, Chembur from factory premises of appellant at Sinnar, Nasik. The invoices raised by Odicee Carrier are supported by insurance details, address of consignee and consignor and vehicle number and receipt of delivery. Though, the assessing officer doubted the delivery of goods but not given any specific reason for such conclusion. The invoices raised by Odicee Career contain all the requisite details. The copy of ledger furnished by assessee shows the sales against these consignees. The details mentioned by the invoices raised by Odicee Career matching with ledger. Once sales are no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ercion and fear and confirm the statement recorded under section 132(4) which is sufficient for making addition against the assessee. 8. On the other hand, the ld. AR of the assessee by referring the statement of Pradip Udeshi submitted that initially his statement was recorded on 02.10.2021 and 03.10.2021 which was immediately retracted by making communication to Investigation Wing on 09.10.2021. Surprisingly, after six months he was called to Delhi for recording his statement. He again retracted his statement immediately on 02.03.2022. The assessing officer made addition of Rs. 3.41 crores. There is no corroborative evidence to support the statement of Pradip Udeshi. The addition is based on third party statement which is not permissible. Rather, during assessment, the assessee furnished complete evidence about genuineness of transportation of goods. The assessee furnished invoices of purchase, transport booking, delivery of challan, payment receipt and ultimate sale below goods transported. The CBDT in its circular dated 10.03.2023 and dated 18.12.2014 made it clear that during the search proceeding, efforts be made for gathering evidence, rather than relying on the statement....