S R Credits Pvt. Ltd., Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

CO 86/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1292 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 26-05-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SATYAJEET GOYAL CAS
• Section: 153A; 14A; 115JB; 143(2); 153; 153C; 132

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: D, NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI G.S. PANNU, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.5216/DEL/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2010-11) DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-29, NEW DELHI. VS. M/S. S.R. CREDITS PVT. LTD. 4828-29/24, 1 ST FLOOR, PRAHLAD LANE, ANSARI ROAD, DARYAGANJ, DELHI PAN AAAPK 4569Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) CROSS OB JECTION NO.86/DEL/ 2019 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.5216/DEL/2015) (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2010-11) M/S. S.R. CREDITS PVT. LTD. 4828-29/24, 1 ST FLOOR, PRAHLAD LANE, ANSARI ROAD, DARYAGANJ, DELHI PAN AAAPK 4569Q VS. DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-29, NEW DELHI (CROSS OBJECTOR) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SH. J.K. MISHRA, CIT- DR RESPONDENT BY SH. R.S.SINGHVI & SH. SATYAJEET GOYAL, CAS DATE OF HEARING 19.02.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 26 .05.2020 ORDER PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE DEPARTMENT AGAINST ORDER DATED 08.05.2015 PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-30, 2 ITA NO.5216/DEL/2015 C.O. NO.86/DEL/2019 DCIT VS. S.R.CREDITS PVT. LTD. NEW DELHI {CIT (A)} AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11. THE CROSS OBJECTION IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE. 2.0 THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT A SEARC H AND SEIZURE OPERATION U/S 132 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CA LLED AS THE ACT) WAS CARRIED OUT ON 21.01.2011 IN THE DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL GROUP OF CASES. THIS GROUP IS ENGAGED IN MANUFACTURING AND TRADING OF CHEWING TOBACCO AND PREMIUM PAN MASALA BESIDES BEING INVOLVED IN FOOD PRODUCTS, PACKING, HOSPITALITY, RUBBER, STEEL AND EDUCATION B USINESSES. THE MAIN OBJECTS OF THIS ASSESSEE COMPANY ARE SALE AND PURCH ASE OF SHARES/MUTUAL FUNDS/OTHER SECURITIES AND FINANCE BUSINESS. DURING THE YEAR, UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE RETURN HAD BEEN FILED DECLARING A INCOME OF RS.13,36,22,526/- WHICH HAD BEEN SET OFF AGAINST THE BUSINESS LOSS BROUGHT FORWARD. THE COMPANY, HOWEVER, PAID TAX UNDER 115JB OF THE ACT AT BOOK PROFITS OF RS.13,25,59,160/- 2.1 IN RESPONSE TO THE STATUTORY NOTICE ISSUED U/S 153A OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FILED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARI NG NIL TAXABLE INCOME AFTER SET OFF OF THE BROUGHT FORWARD LOSSES. THE ASS ESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 153A OF THE ACT AT AN INCOME OF RS.5,60,11,176/ - AFTER ALLOWING SET OF 3 ITA NO.5216/DEL/2015 C.O. NO.86/DEL/2019 DCIT VS. S.R.CREDITS PVT. LTD. BROUGHT FORWARD LOSSES OF RS.17,58,85,403/-. THIS IN COME WAS COMPUTED AFTER MAKING THE FOLLOWING DISALLOWANCES: (I) DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF LEGAL AND PROFESSIONA L EXPENSES - RS.2,78,43,961/-. (II)ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF LOSSES ON ACCOUNT OF SHA RES RS.7,03,15,125/- (III) DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A - RS.1,14,967/-. 2.2 AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE APPROACHED THE LD. F IRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY WHO WAS PLEASED TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.2,78,43,961/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF LEGAL AND PROFES SIONAL EXPENSES. THE LD. CIT (A) ALSO ALLOWED THE LOSSES OF RS.7,03,15,1 25/- ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF SHARES OF M/S BLUE WINGS TOURS & TRAVELS PVT. LT D. AND ALSO HELD THAT THE THESE TRANSACTIONS WERE GENUINE. THE LD. CIT (A ) ALSO HELD THAT THE TRANSACTIONS OF SALE OF SHARES OF M/S COSTAL POWER PROJECTS (P) LTD. WERE REAL TRANSACTIONS RELATING TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. 2.3 THE DEPARTMENT IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE TH IS TRIBUNAL CHALLENGING THE ADJUDICATION BY THE LD. CIT (A). T HE FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE DEPARTMENT: 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW & ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF 4 ITA NO.5216/DEL/2015 C.O. NO.86/DEL/2019 DCIT VS. S.R.CREDITS PVT. LTD. RS.2,78,43,961/- MADE BY AO ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWA NCES OF LEGAL AND PROFESSIONAL EXPENSES. 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW & ON FACTS IN ALLOWING THE LOSSES OF RS. 7,03,15,125/- ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF SHARES OF M/S B LUE WING TOURS & TRAVELS (P) LTD. 3. WHETHER ON THE FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, THE LD. CIT (A) ERRED IN LAW & ON FACTS BY HOLDING THAT TRA NSACTION OF SALE OF SHARES OF M/S COSTAL POWER PROJECTS (P) LTD IS A REAL TRANSACTION AND RELATES TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. 4. WHETHER ON THE FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW & ON FACTS BY ACCEPTING TH E TRANSACTION OF SALE OF SHARES OF M/S BLUE WING TOURS & TRAVELS (P) LTD. AS A GENUINE TRANSACTION WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS THAT HAS BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE AO DURING ASSESSMENT PROCE EDINGS. 5. THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) IS ERRONEOUS AND IS NOT TENABLE ON FACTS AND IN LAW. 6. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER OR AMEN D ANY/ ALL OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR DURING THE COURSE O F THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 2.4 THE ASSESSEE, IN ITS CROSS OBJECTION, HAS PRIMA RY CONTENDED THAT THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT WAS MADE WITHOUT ANY INCRIMINATIN G MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. THE FOLLOWING G ROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THE MEMORANDUM OF CROSS OBJECTIONS. 1(I) THAT ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE OF LEGAL AND PROFESSIONAL EXPENSES TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 2,78,43,961/- AND LOSS ON SALE OF SHARES OF RS. 7,03,15,125/- 5 ITA NO.5216/DEL/2015 C.O. NO.86/DEL/2019 DCIT VS. S.R.CREDITS PVT. LTD. BEING NOT BASED ON ANY INCRIMINATING FOUND DURING C OURSE OF SEARCH ON THE ASSESSEE, THE SAME ARE ILLEGAL AND WI THOUT JURISDICTION U/S 153A OF THE ACT. (II) THAT THE WHOLE BASIS OF DISALLOWANCE BEING BASED ON THIRD PARTY DOCUMENT AND THERE BEING NO CASE OF ANY INCRI MINATING DOCUMENT FOUND FROM THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE, T HE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCES COULD NOT HAVE BEEN MADE IN PROCEEDIN GS U/S 153A OF THE ACT. (III) THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING FAILED TO COMPLY WITH PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153C AND IN ABSENCE OF RECORD ING OF REQUISITE SATISFACTION WITH REGARD TO DOCUMENT FOUND DURING S EARCH ON THIRD PARTY, THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCES ARE NOT SUSTAINAB LE U/S 153A OF THE ACT. 2. THAT IN ANY CASE, IN ABSENCE OF ISSUANCE AND SERVICE OF NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE ACT, THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS U/S 1 53A ARE ILLEGAL AND IN DISREGARD TO SCHEME OF THE ACT AND SETTLED L EGAL PRINCIPLE. 3.0 AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTAT IVE SUBMITTED THAT THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGE D THE VERY FOUNDATION OF THE ASSESSMENT AND PRAYED THAT THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE MUST BE HEARD FIRST BECAUSE IF THE SAME IS DECIDED IN AS SESSEES FAVOUR, THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT WOULD NOT STAND. 3.1 THE LD. CIT-DR HAD NO OBJECTION TO THIS PROP OSAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 6 ITA NO.5216/DEL/2015 C.O. NO.86/DEL/2019 DCIT VS. S.R.CREDITS PVT. LTD. 4.0 THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE IMPUGNED ASSESS MENT WAS FRAMED WITHOUT HAVING ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL BEI NG FOUND AND SEIZED IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. HE DREW OUR ATTENTION T O PAGE -7 OF THE PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, WHICH IS COPY OF THE REP LY DATED 06.01.2020 RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPONSE TO THE APPLIC ATION MOVED UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005 BY THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT IN RESPONSE TO THE DETAILS REQUIRED UNDER SERIAL NO . A.C. IN THE SAID REPLY WHEREIN THE DETAILS WERE REQUIRED REGARDING ANY INCR IMINATING MATERIAL RELATING TO OR BELONGING TO THE ASSESSEE FOUND FROM THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE DURING SEARCH U/S 132 OF THE ACT, THE RESP ONSE AGAINST THIS QUERY IS LEFT BLANK. HE ALSO DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE REPLY TO ASSESSEES APPLICATION UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005 WHE REIN THE ASSESSEE HAD REQUESTED COPY OF DOCUMENTS FOUND AND SEIZED FR OM THE PREMISES OF THE DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL GROUP WHICH WERE CONSIDERED FOR THE PURPOSES OF MAKING DISALLOWANCES IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT, AS PER THE REPLY RECEIVED, THESE DOCUMENTS WERE CONTAI NED IN PAGES 1 TO 158 OF ANNEXURE AA-1 SEIZED FROM A-85, SECTOR-2, NOIDA, BEING OFFICES OF M/S DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LTD. AND PAGES 1 TO 30 OF ANNEXU RE AA-10 SEIZED FROM THE SAME ADDRESS. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT, THUS, IT WAS APPARENT THAT 7 ITA NO.5216/DEL/2015 C.O. NO.86/DEL/2019 DCIT VS. S.R.CREDITS PVT. LTD. THIRD PARTY DOCUMENTS WERE USED FOR MAKING THE IMPU GNED ASSESSMENT. HE ALSO DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT THE IMP UGNED ASSESSMENT HAD BEEN FRAMED U/S 153A OF THE ACT AND NOT U/S 153C OF THE ACT. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT, THUS, THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT WAS MA DE ON ALLEGED INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND AT THE THIRD PARTY PRE MISES. RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH CO URT IN THE CASE OF PR. CIT VS. MEETA GUTGUTIA REPORTED IN 395 ITR 526 (DEL .) FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT INVOCATION OF SECTION 153A TO RE-OPEN CONCLUDE D ASSESSMENTS OF ASSESSMENT YEARS EARLIER TO YEAR OF SEARCH WAS NOT J USTIFIED IN ABSENCE OF INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING SEARCH QUA EACH SUCH EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEAR. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE REVE NUES SLP AGAINST THIS ORDER OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT WAS DISMI SSED BY THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF PR.CIT VS. MEETA GUTGUTIA REPORTED IN 257 TAXMAN 441 (SC) . RELIANCE WAS ALSO PLACED ON THE ORDER OF ITAT DELH I BENCH IN THE CASE OF TRILOK CHAND CHOUDHARY VS. ACIT IN ITA NO.5870/DEL/2017 AND ANOTHER CASE OF DCIT VS. SHIVALI MAHAJAN IN ITA NO.5585/DEL/2015. 4.1 THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED TH AT THE SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED ONLY AT 4828/24, PRAHLAD LANE, ANSARI ROA D, DARYAGANJ, NEW 8 ITA NO.5216/DEL/2015 C.O. NO.86/DEL/2019 DCIT VS. S.R.CREDITS PVT. LTD. DELHI WHEREAS THE DOCUMENTS WERE FOUND AT A-85, SEC. 2, NOIDA. HE ALSO DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT EVEN IN THE PANCHNAMA , NAME OF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR. HE DREW OUR ATTENTION TO CO PY OF THE PANCHNAMA PLACED AT PAGE-9 OF THE PAPER BOOK, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT IN VIEW OF THE SETTLED JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS, THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMEN T DESERVED TO BE QUASHED. 5.0 IN RESPONSE, THE LD. CIT-DR VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTE D THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S 153A OF THE ACT AND SAID THAT THE WARRANT CONTAINED THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE AND, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSMENT FRAM ED WAS CORRECT IN LAW. 6.0 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE AL SO PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED COPY OF TH E PANCHNAMA THROUGH WHICH THE DOCUMENTS IN DISPUTE WAS SEIZED. ON PERUSAL OF THE PANCHNAMA , WE FIND THAT THE PANCHNAMA IS NOT CONTAINING THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE MATERIA L RELIED UPON FOR MAKING THE IMPUGNED ADDITION WAS NOT FOUND FROM THE PREMISE S OF THE ASSESSEE. WE ALSO NOTE THAT DURING RELEVANT PERIOD, FOR USING ANY MATERIAL FOUND FROM THE PREMISES OF THE THIRD PARTY DURING THE COU RSE OF THE SEARCH IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER OF THE THIRD 9 ITA NO.5216/DEL/2015 C.O. NO.86/DEL/2019 DCIT VS. S.R.CREDITS PVT. LTD. PARTY WAS REQUIRED TO RECORD SATISFACTION AS THE MAT ERIAL BELONGING TO THE ASSESSEE IN TERMS OF SECTION 153C OF THE ACT AND WAS THEN REQUIRED TO PROCEED AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153C OF TH E ACT. IN THE INSTANT CASE, IT IS EVIDENT THAT ADDITION IN DISPUTE HAS BE EN MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 153A OF THE ACT. THE ACT HAS PROVIDED SEPARATE PROVISIONS FOR MAKING ASSESSMENTS IN CASE OF MATERIAL FOUND IN THE COURSE OF THE SEARCH FROM THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE MATERIAL FOUND IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH AT TH E PREMISES OF THE THIRD PARTY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS REQUIRED TO FOLLOW T HE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN IN THE ACT FOR MAKING THE ASSESSMENT AND HE CANNOT DEVISE HIS OWN PROCEDURE. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, WHEN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS COVERED UNDER THE PROVISION OF SECTION 153 OF THE A CT AND IF RELIANCE IS PLACED ON THE INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING T HE COURSE OF SEARCH OF THIRD-PARTY, THEN PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153C OF THE ACT WOULD BE APPLICABLE AND HAVE TO BE ADHERED TO. 6.1.1 IN THE CASE OF SHIVANI MAHAJAN (SUPRA), IDEN TICAL QUESTION WAS RAISED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AS UNDER: 9. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. AFTER CO NSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE FIN D THAT IN THESE APPEALS, FOLLOWING TWO QUESTIONS ARISE FOR OUR CONS IDERATION: 10 ITA NO.5216/DEL/2015 C.O. NO.86/DEL/2019 DCIT VS. S.R.CREDITS PVT. LTD. (I) WHETHER ANY MATERIAL FOUND IN THE SEARCH OF ANY OTHER PERSON THAN THE ASSESSEE IN APPEAL CAN BE CONSIDERED IN T HE ASSESSMENT UNDER 153A OF THE ASSESSEE. 6.1.2 THE TRIBUNAL AFTER CONSIDERING ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES HELD AS UNDER: 14. FROM A READING OF THE ABOVE DECISIONS OF HON'B LE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, IT IS EVIDENT THAT COMPL ETED ASSESSMENT CAN BE INTERFERED WITH BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE BASIS OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL UNEARTHED D URING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. IF IN RELATION TO ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL IS FOUND, NO ADDITION OR DIS ALLOWANCE CAN BE MADE IN RELATION TO THAT YEAR IN EXERCISE OF POW ER UNDER SECTION 153 OF THE ACT. OBVIOUSLY, THE REFERENCE TO THE INCRIMINATING MATERIAL IN THE ABOVE DECISIONS OF HO N'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IS IN REGARD TO INCRIMINA TING MATERIAL FOUND AS A RESULT OF SEARCH OF THE ASSESSEE'S PREMI SES AND NOT OF ANY OTHER ASSESSEE. THE LEGISLATURE HAS PROVIDED SE CTION 153C BY INVOKING THE SAME THE REVENUE CAN UTILIZE THE IN CRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND IN THE CASE OF SEARCH OF ANY OTHER P ERSON TO THE DIFFERENT ASSESSEE. 15. THUS, WHEN DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH OF AN ASSESSEE ANY BOOKS, DOCUMENT OR MONEY, BULLION, JEWELLERY ETC. I S FOUND WHICH RELATES TO A PERSON OTHER THAN THE PERSON SEARCHED, THEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF THE PERSON SEARCHED SHALL HAND OVER SUCH BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, DOCUMENTS, OR VALUABLES TO THE AS SESSING OFFICER OF SUCH OTHER PERSON AND THEREAFTER, THE AS SESSING OFFICER OF SUCH OTHER PERSON CAN PROCEED AGAINST SUCH OTHER PERSON. HOWEVER, IN THE CASE UNDER APPEAL BEFORE US, ADMITT EDLY, SECTION 153C IS NOT INVOKED IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSMENT IS FRAMED UNDER SECTION 153A. WE, RESPEC TFULLY FOLLOWING THE ABOVE DECISIONS OF HON'BLE JURISDICTI ONAL HIGH COURT, HOLD THAT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT UN DER SECTION 153A, THE INCRIMINATING MATERIAL, IF ANY, FOUND DUR ING THE COURSE 11 ITA NO.5216/DEL/2015 C.O. NO.86/DEL/2019 DCIT VS. S.R.CREDITS PVT. LTD. OF SEARCH OF THE ASSESSEE ONLY CAN BE UTILIZED AND NOT THE MATERIAL FOUND IN THE SEARCH OF ANY OTHER PERSON. 6.2 FURTHER, THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE C ASE OF PR. CIT VS. MEETA GUTGUTIA REPORTED IN 395 ITR 526 (DEL.) HAS HELD THAT THE INVOCATION OF SECTION 153A TO RE-OPEN CONCLUDED ASSESSMENTS OF ASSESSMENT YEARS EARLIER TO YEAR OF SEARCH WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN ABSEN CE OF INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING SEARCH QUA EACH SUCH EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE REVENUES SLP AGAINST THIS ORDER OF THE HONBLE DEL HI HIGH COURT WAS DISMISSED BY THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF PR.CIT VS. MEETA GUTGUTIA REPORTED IN 257 TAXMAN 441 (SC) . APPARENTLY, IN THE PRESENT CASE, NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL WAS FOUND QUA THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IN QUESTION. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY THE ASSESSING O FFICER IN VIOLATION OF THE PROCEDURE PROVIDED IN THE ACT IS BAD IN LAW AND VOID AB INITIO AND CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. THEREFORE, PLACING RELIANCE ON THE ABOVE MENTIONED JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS, WE QUASH THE IMPUGNED ASSESSME NT ORDER. ACCORDINGLY, THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE ST ANDS ALLOWED. 6.3 SINCE, WE HAVE ALLOWED THE CROSS OBJECTION OF T HE ASSESSEE AND HAVE QUASHED THE ASSESSMENT, THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMEN T DOES NOT SURVIVE AND IT IS DISMISSED AS IN FRUCTUOUS . 12 ITA NO.5216/DEL/2015 C.O. NO.86/DEL/2019 DCIT VS. S.R.CREDITS PVT. LTD. 7.0 IN THE FINAL RESULT, THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED WHEREAS THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 26/05/2020. SD/- SD/- (G.S.PANNU) (SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEM BER DATED:26/05/2020 PK/PS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI