DCIT, CC-18, DELHI V. PARKASH SACHDEVA, DELHI

ITA 3028/DEL/2023

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by the Revenue against the orders of the Ld CIT(A) concerning the assessment years 2015-16 and 2016-17. The appeals were based on the additions made by the Assessing Officer regarding bogus unsecured loans and commission payments, which were considered as unexplained income under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee, Parkash Sachdeva, a director of M/s Laxmi Remote India Pvt. Ltd., was implicated following a search and seizure operation related to the Laxmi Remote Group. The group was accused of receiving accommodation entries through an entry operator. However, the Settlement Commission had accepted the disclosures made by the assessee, leading to the deletion of the additions by the Ld CIT(A). The Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's appeals and dismissed them.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 470359 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S P GOGIA
• Assessee Lawyers: D S SIDHU
• Keywords: Search and seizure; Accommodation entries; Bogus
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 69A

Judgement Text

"P a g e | 1 ITA Nos.3028 & 3035/Del/2023 Parkash Sachdeva (AYs: 2015-16 & 2016-17) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.3028 & 3035/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16 & 2016-17) DCIT,CC-18 Room No.269B, 2nd Floor, Ara Centre, E-2, Block, Jhandewalan Extn. Delhi- 110055 Vs. Parkash Sachdeva 3/4-C, Pocket-B, Ashok Vihar, Phase-III, Delhi – 110052 \u0001थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAXPS6506N Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Sh. S P Gogia, Adv. Respondent by : Sh. D S Sidhu, CIT, DR Date of Hearing 13.02.2025 Date of Pronouncement 27.02.2025 O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY: (JM): The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the common order dated 17.08.2023 passed by the Ld CIT(A)-27, Delhi, arising out of the common assessment order passed by the ACIT,CC-18 Delhi dated 30.12.2019 under Section 143(3) r.w.s 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for Assessment Years 2015-16 & 2016-17 respectively. Since, common issue and identical facts P a g e | 2 ITA Nos.3028 & 3035/Del/2023 Parkash Sachdeva (AYs: 2015-16 & 2016-17) are involved in these appeals, these are heard analogously and are being disposed of by a common order for the sake convenience by taking ITA No.3028/Del/2023 as a lead case. ITA No.3028/Del/2023 (AY: 2015-16) 2. A search and seizure operation was conducted on the business and residential premises of various persons/entities in the case of Laxmi Remote Group of cases based in Delhi. Such group is mainly engaged in manufacturing of remote, set top box, battery etc. the assessee is one of the directors of the company M/s Laxmi Remote India Pvt. Ltd. It is the case of the revenue that such group including the assessee company had received accommodation through entry operator/facilitator like Ashish Begwani and Associates mainly in the form of unsecured loans over the period from financial year 2012-13 to 2016-17. Considering the facts and circumstances of the matter particularly the search conducted the company decided to file petition before the Hon’ble Settlement Commission which was so filed on 26.12.2019. Since, the company was the end user of the accommodation entries taken from the entry operator and the directors and the company had only source of income i.e. income from business run by the assessee thus all the accommodation entries along with their interests reflecting in the books of the director and jewellery found and seized during search, part of disclosure in the application/petition filed before the Hon’ble Settlement Commission which was accepted by the Hon’ble Interim Board of Settlement Commission. In fact, in the year under consideration the addition was made for a sum of Rs.328,00,000/- on account of accommodation entry/bogus unsecured loans and Rs.9,84,000/- on account of P a g e | 3 ITA Nos.3028 & 3035/Del/2023 Parkash Sachdeva (AYs: 2015-16 & 2016-17) commission. As the addition made by the AO has already offered for taxation and due tax thereon as already been paid by the assessee which was stated before the Hon’ble Settlement Commission while filing the petition before it, the Settlement Commission came to a finding at paragraph 5 to this effect that “in respect of remaining issue discussed in the preceding paragraph of this order, we have considered the contentions of the applicant and the department during the hearings and various written submissions/reports submitted in this regard. We were of the view that no further addition is called for on the remaining issue” considering this particular aspect of the matter and the para 2 of the petition filed consisting the details of loans received, repayment of loans and commission paid by the applicant, its directors and family members and sister concern. 3. In the appeal preferred before the Ld. CIT(A) it was observed that the addition of Rs.328,00,000/- on account of bogus unsecured loans as unexplained income under Section 69A of the Act and addition of Rs.9,84,000/- on account of payment of commission for taking the accommodation entry had duly been considered by the Hon’ble Interim Board for Settlement-VII Chennai by and under its order dated 24.04.2023 accepted the same as offered by Laxmi Remote Group without making any adjustment in this regard and having regard to this particular aspect of the matter the addition made by the Ld. AO as discussed hereinabove on account of bogus unsecured loans as unexplained income and on account of payment of commission have been deleted by the Ld. CIT(A) which in our considered opinion is just and proper so as not to warrant interference. We, thus, the appeal P a g e | 4 ITA Nos.3028 & 3035/Del/2023 Parkash Sachdeva (AYs: 2015-16 & 2016-17) preferred by the Revenue is found to be devoid of any merit and hence dismissed. 4. Having regard to the identical facts and circumstances of the matter, this order will also applied in ITA No. 3035/Del/2023 preferred by the Revenue for AY. 2016-17. 5. Both the appeal of the Revenue are, thus, dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 27.02.2025 Sd/- (S.Rifaur Rahman) Sd/- (Madhumita Roy ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 27.02.2025 PS: Rohit Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI "