INCOME TAX OFFICER Vs. DIPAK DUTTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by revenue is arising out of order of CIT(A) -XXXIII, Kolkata in Appeal No. 193/CIT(A) -XXXIII/ITO Wd -53(1)Kolkata/08 -09 dated 04.06.2012. Assessment was framed by ITO, Ward -53(1), Kol u/s. 143(3) of the Income -tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for Assessment Year 2006 -07 vide his order dated 29.12.2008.

(2.) THE only issue in this appeal of revenue is against the order of CIT(A) deleting the addition of sundry creditors. For this revenue has raised following ground Nos. 1 and 2:

(3.) BEFORE us, Ld. Sr. DR stated that even during remand proceedings, the assessee is unable to supply information in respect to notices issued u/s. 133(6) of the Act to various parties. According to Ld. Sr. DR, the amount of sundry creditors were much higher than the amount of expenses disclosed in the P&L Account and once this is the position, the liability seems to be bogus. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the assessee relied on the order of CIT(A).