Saksham Industries Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)
AO made addition u/sec.40A(3) alleging that assessee had made cash purchases in a day of Rs.3,36,551/- from M/s.M M Pvt. Ltd. Assessee contended that they have not made any purchases during the year from M/s.M M Pvt. Ltd. Assessee had asked AO to provide copy of the information received by AO, on the basis of which notice u/s.148 was issued. Assrssee contended that till date, no such information has been provided and that the AO was not having any information and notice u/sec.148 is bad in law.
CIT(A) confirmed that addition & on further appeal the Tribunal observed that AO had not provided copy of the reasons and information to the assessee, though assessee had asked for copy of the information. Tribunal noted that the assessee has categorically denied that they he had made any purchases from M/s.M M Pvt. Ltd. Once assessee had denied any transaction with M/s.M M Pvt. Ltd., the onus shifted to the AO to prove the allegation. In this case, AO has not brought on record any positive evidence to prove that assessee has made cash purchases from M/s.M M Pvt. Ltd.In these facts and circumstances of the case, Tribunal was convinced that the addition made by the AO is not sustainable & the addition was deleted.
