Sh. Ankit Kapoor, B-102, R.G. City Centre, Plot No. 4, Motia Khan, Paharganj, New Delhi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-63(4), New Delhi
October, 27th 2021
This Miscel laneous Appl ication is arising out in ITA No. 7692/Del/2018 vide order dated 06.02.2019.
2. The assessee is engaged in the business of Trading and Export of processed and non-processed edible products during the year. The sale off the assessee was increased from Rs.8.23 Crores to Rs.58.81 Crores. The Assessing Off icer held that there was more than 700% growth whereas the GP went down by 2.3%. Before the AO, the assessee explained that the reason was due to computation in the market.
3. On going through the facts, the Assessing Of f icer held as under:
“I am not satisf ied with the submission of the assessee that due to competition in the market when the sales increase more than 700%. In the absence of proper submission and details, I disal low a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- to cover the leakage in the trading results and is added to the income of the assessee.”
The Assessing Off icer further made addition of Rs.5.14 Crores on account of “sundry creditors” which is the total outstanding amount under the head “sundry creditors” owing to non-furnishing of confirmations in response to the notices issued u/s 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. While the notices have been issued to the “sundry creditors” of value of Rs.2.58 Crores out of which repl ies have been received from the creditors to the tune of Rs.1.30 Crores, the addition should be rightly of Rs.1.28 Crores only which stands corrected by the ld. CIT(A). This is an apparent error in the Assessment Order. From the record, we find that the fact of non-receipt of the response from the “sundry creditors” has not been intimated to the assessee neither any show cause notice has been issued before making the addition which is a clear infraction of the principles of natural justice.