Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Ground No.2

7. Regarding deletion of Rs.49,89,425/-, the assessee has submitted that the DD amount of Rs.49,39,425/- has wrongly been debited into the Sun Minerals accounts and has placed a ledger copy of Sun Minerals and Sunlight Minerals which is placed at paper book No.140 and 141 respectively. On perusal of the page no. 140, we obereved that there are two entries only one is opening credit balance of Rs. 6,91,474/- and other is debit entry on 21.08.2006 regarding payment of Rs. 49,89,425/- with a narration " Ch. No. 139481 DD No. 554169 paid to Sun Light Minerals twds on a/c of iron ore purchased" , thereafter arrived closing balance of Rs.42,97,951/-. The CIT(A) accepted the contention of the assessee that it has wrongly been debited into the Sun Minrals Ledger a/c Instead of Sunlight Minerals and both are sister concerns. The ld.CIT(A) has not considered the corresponding entry reflection. If one account is debited wrongly then the other corresponding accounts ought to which to be debited the credit balance will remain unchanged. The scaned copy of Sunlight Mineral is as under.

7.1 On perusal of the above ledger copy there is no any purchase made by the assessee on or before 21.08.2006 on credit basis . The reading of the narration with grammatical sense as per the journal entry in the Sun Minerals the materials have already been purchased and against the assessee has paid but on perusal of ledger of both the parties there is no such entry found. If we accept the findings the CI(TA) regarding wrongly debited in the sun mineral a/c then at the year end there must be credit balance of the sunlight minerals for the same amount of Rs.49,89,425/- or after balancing amount as shown above. On the perusal of the financial statement, we could not find any credit balance in respect of Sunlgiht Minerals or any after adjustment, we note that there is only credit balance in the name of sunlight minerals of Rs.5,00,000/-. It clearly proves that there was a malafide intention of the assessee for providing wrong facts before the lower authorities. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances the ld.CIT(A) has wrongly accepted the contention of the assessee. We upheld order of the AO. Accordingly, the appeal of the revenue is allowed.