| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 0925 (Mum-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 145(3)
Where assessee being a BIFR company could not produce inward and out ward register before AO as there was communication gap between AO and the manager taxation of assessee, however, assessee had already produced bills and invoices including deliery challans/lorry receipts, rejection of books of account by AO was not justified especially when AO had not doubted genuineness or veracity of purchases/sales documents. AO had not commented adversely on any purchases/sales documents even in his remand report and had not raised any such ground challenging admissibility of additional evidences admitted by CIT(A) under rule 46A(1).
|
Accounting method - Rejection - Inward and outsard register not furnished before AO - Assessee having furnished delivery challans/lorry receipts
Assessee-company was engaged in the business of project engineering and manufacturing of TPE. AO required assessee to furnish ledger of creditors, original purchase bills with delivery challans, lorry receipts, original sale bills with delivery challans, lorry receipts, original inward register and outward register. As assessee could not produce inward and out ward register, AO rejected assessee's books and applied the profit rate of 31.63% as against GP declared at 28.73%. CIT(A) agter going through the submissions of assessee and details noted that assessee had filed complete details and being a BIFR company and there was communication gap between AO and the manager taxation of assessee with regard to production of documents particularly inward and outward registers. Hence, he accepted claim of assessee and deleted addition. Revenue challenged this.Held: As apparent, assessee filed all the details and documents called for by AO except inward and outward register, but in any case, inward and outward register only corroborated purchases and sales and for that purpose, assessee had already produced bills and invoices including deliery challans/lorry receipts during assessment proceedings. Even, AO had impounded several of such invoices/bill files and did not doubt genuineness or veracity of purchases/sales documents. AO had not commented adversely on any purchases/sales documents even in his remand report and had not raised any such ground challenging admissibility of additional evidences admitted by CIT(A) under rule 46A(1). Thus, it could be said that CIT(A) accepted assessee's books of account because there was no defect pointed by AO therein and moreover, each and every details were poduced by assessee before AO which was considered by CIT(A) in detail, Hence, order of accepting book results was upheld.
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.
A.Y. : 2011-12
INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 32(2)
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|