RKG Housing (P) Ltd., New delhi V. ITO, Ward- 20(3), New Delhi

ITA 1565/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2850 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-09-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 06-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S L ANURAGI
• Assessee Lawyers: DEVINDER PAL
• Keywords: Search and seizure; Document seized; Accommodation entries; Competent authority; Reason to believe; Documents seized
• Section: 69C; 68; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES SMC: DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NO.1565/DEL./2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-2008 M/S. RKG HOUSING (P) LTD., NEW DELHI. PAN AADCR4900J C/O. SH. DEVINDER PAL, ADVOCATE, 8756/3, FF MULTANI DHANDA, PAHAR GANJ, NEW DELHI 110055 PAN AADCR4900J VS., THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-20(3), C.R. BUILDING, ITO, NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI DEVINDER PAL, ADVOCATE FOR REVENUE : SHRI S.L. ANURAGI, SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 19.08.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.09.2019 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-36, NEW DELHI, DATED 01.12.2017, FOR THE A.Y. 2007-2008. 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEE COMPANY FILED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING LOSS OF RS .537/- 2 ITA.NO.1565/DEL./2018 M/S. RKG HOUSING (P) LTD., NEW DELHI. ON 24.09.2007. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY U NDER SECTION 147/148 OF THE I.T. ACT AND NOTICE UNDER SE CTION 148 WAS ISSUED AFTER RECORDING REASONS AND GETTING APPR OVAL OF THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY. THE REASONS ARE REPRODUCED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS UNDER : A SEARCH & SEIZURE ACTION WAS CONDUCTED BY UNIT-VI (2) AT THE RESIDENCE AND OFFICES OF SH. SURENDER KUMAR JAIN AND. SH. VIRENDER JAIN ON 14.09.2010 VARIOUS INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS/MATERIAL WAS SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. DURING THE POST SEARCH INVESTIGATION AND PERUSAL OF SEIZED DOCUMENTS IT WA S OBSERVED THAT SH. SURENDER 1 KUMAR JAIN AND SH. VIRENDER JAIN WERE ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF PROVI DING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES BY PROVIDING CHEQUES/PO/DD IN LIEU OF CASH TO A LARGE NUMBER OF BENEFICIARY COMPA NIES THOROUGH VARIOUS PAPER AND DUMMY COMPANIES FLOATED AND CONTROLLED BY THEM. IT WAS ALSO EVIDENTLY ESTABLISHED BY THE WING THAT SH. SURENDER KUMAR JAI N AND SH. VIRENDER JAIN ARE KNOWN ENTRY PROVIDERS AND ARE THE ACTUAL CONTROLLERS OF MORE THAN 100 COMPANI ES/ 3 ITA.NO.1565/DEL./2018 M/S. RKG HOUSING (P) LTD., NEW DELHI. PROPRIETARY FIRMS/PARTNERSHIP FIRMS. THEY CONTROL T HESE ENTITIES THROUGH VARIOUS PERSONS, BY APPOINTING THE M AS DIRECTORS/PARTNERS/PROPRIETORS APART FROM NOMINATIN G THEM AS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORIES FOR MAINTAINING THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF THESE ENTITIES BUT IN FACT ALL THESE PE RSONS ACT ONLY AS THEIR STOOGES. THE CASH RECEIVED FROM T HE RECIPIENT PARTIES FOR PROVIDING THE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES WAS FIRST DEPOSITED IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THES E DUMMY FIRMS/COMPANIES IN THE DISGUISE OF THE CASH RECEIVED AGAINST THE BOGUS SALES, DULY SHOWN IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. FROM THERE, THIS CASH WAS TRANSFERRED TO THE DIFFERENT PAPER COMPANIES FLOATE D BY SH. SURENDER KUMAR JAIN AND SH. VIRENDER KUMAR JAIN THROUGH A COMPLEX TRAIL OF TRANSACTIONS, SO AS TO H IDE THE ACTUAL SOURCES OF FUNDS OF THE LAST SET OF RECIPIEN T COMPANIES OF SH. SURENDER KUMAR JAIN AND SH. VIRENDER KUMAR JAIN. IN THIS WAY, THE RESERVE AND SURPLUSES AND THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF A SPECIFIC SET OF COMPANIES ARE ENHANCED WITH THE HELP OF THE UNEXPLAINED CASH 4 ITA.NO.1565/DEL./2018 M/S. RKG HOUSING (P) LTD., NEW DELHI. RECEIVED BY SH. SURENDER KUMAR JAIN AND SH. VIRENDE R KUMAR JAIN, WHICH IS ROUTED TO THESE COMPANIES THRO UGH THEIR DUMMY FIRM/COMPANIES. ONCE THE FUNDS OF THESE COMPANIES HAVE BEEN ENHANCED SUFFICIENTLY, ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES THROUGH RTGS/ CHEQUE IN THE SHAPE OF THE SHARE CAPITAL, CAPITAL GAINS OR LOANS AS PER THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT OF THE RECIPIENT CLIENTS W ERE PROVIDED THEM IN LIEU OF THE CASH RECEIVED FROM THE M. IN THIS WAY, THE CHAIN FOR PROVIDING AN ACCOMMODATION , ENTRY GETS COMPLETED. AS PER SEIZED ANNEXURE, THE ASSESSEE M/S RKG HOUSING P. LTD. HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING ACCOMMODATI ON ENTRIES FROM THE FOLLOWING PERSON (BENEFICIARY) AS PER DETAILS HEREUNDER: - BANK BOOK DATE FROM TO (BENEFIC IARY) BANK CHEQUE /RTGS CHEQUE DATE AMOUNT THROUGH ANNX. NO. PG. NO. 01-02-07 HILLRIDGE INVESTMENT S LTD. RKG HOUSING P. LTD. HDFC 01-02-07 20,00,000 KUKREJA A-65 4 08-02-07 HILLRIDGE INVESTMENT S LTD RKG HOUSING P. LTD. UTI CH. NO. 068153 08-02-07 20,00,000 KUKREJA A-65 14 5 ITA.NO.1565/DEL./2018 M/S. RKG HOUSING (P) LTD., NEW DELHI. IN VIEW OF THE REPORT RECEIVED FROM O/O THE DIT (INV), NEW DELHI AND IN VIEW OF THE FACTS NARRATED ABOVE IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PROVIDED ITS OWN CASH TO ARRANGE A CREDIT ENTRY FROM THE COMPANY HILLRIDGE INVESTMENT LTD. CONTROLLED BY SH SURENDER KUMAR JAIN AND VIRENDER JAIN. THUS, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DISCLOSED FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR ITS ASSESSMENT FOR THAT ASSESSMENT YEAR, THEREFORE, REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THE SUM OF RS. 40,00,000/- CHARGEABLE TO TAX' HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. 2.1. THE ASSESSEE, IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148, FILED LETTER STATING THAT RETURN FILED ORIGINALLY MAY BE TREATED AS RETURN FILED IN PURSUANCE TO NOTI CE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE I.T. ACT. THE A.O. ISSUED STATUT ORY NOTICES FOR COMPLETION OF RE-ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE A. O. NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINES S OF INVESTMENT IN REAL ESTATE/SECURITIES. AS PER SEIZED ANNEXURE, THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY HAS TAKEN THE ACCOMMODATION EN TRIES 6 ITA.NO.1565/DEL./2018 M/S. RKG HOUSING (P) LTD., NEW DELHI. FROM M/S. HILLRIDGE INVESTMENT LTD., AMOUNTING TO RS.40,00,000/-. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED COPY OF SHA RE APPLICATION FORM, COPY OF BANK STATEMENT, COPY OF I TR ETC. IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM OF HAVING ENTERED INTO GENUINE TRANSACTION. PERUSAL OF BANK ACCOUNT REVEALS THAT T HERE HAVE BEEN REGULAR DEBIT AND CREDIT ENTRIES OF EQUIVALENT AMOUNTS WITHIN A SPAN OF 2-3 DAYS. SUCH IS A GENERAL PHENOM ENON IN THE CASE OF THE ENTRY PROVIDERS. THE BANK ACCOUNT O F THE INVESTOR CLEARLY DEFIES THE CLAIM OF GENUINENESS AN D CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE PERSON WHO HAVE ALLEGEDLY M ADE THE INVESTMENT AS THEY NEVER HAD SUFFICIENT BALANCES AND THE CHEQUE ISSUED TO THE BENEFICIARIES ARE CLEARED BY W AY OF TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM ASSOCIATE CONCERNS INVOLVED IN THE BUSINESS OF PROVIDING BOGUS ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. AS PER EXPLANATION OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE ABOUT THE NATUR E AND SOURCE OF THE SUMS FOUND CREDITED IN THE BOOKS WAS NOT SATISFACTORILY EXPLAINED AND THERE WAS A PRIMA FACI E EVIDENCE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE OF RECEIPT OF BOGUS ACCOMMODAT ION ENTRY. THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO DISCHARGE ITS ONU S TO 7 ITA.NO.1565/DEL./2018 M/S. RKG HOUSING (P) LTD., NEW DELHI. PRODUCE LEGALLY ACCEPTABLE EVIDENCE OF CREDITWORTHI NESS OF THE SUBSCRIBED. THIS IS CONSCIOUS AND WILLFUL ATTEM PT ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO INCREASE THE SHARE CAPITAL BY WAY OF ENTERING INTO BOGUS TRANSACTION. THE ASSESSEE WAS R EQUIRED TO PRODUCE ONE OF THE DIRECTORS OF THE COMPANY TO C HECK THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION AND TO SEE WHETHER I T WAS A REAL INVESTOR OR ONLY AN ANGEL INVESTOR. SH. NAVEEN KUMAR ONE OF THE DIRECTOR OF M/S HILLRIDGE INVESTMENT LTD WAS PRODUCED AND HIS STATEMENT ON OATH WAS RECORDED, ON 24.2.2015. AS PER HIS STATEMENT, HE JOINED THIS COM PANY AS ACCOUNTANT IN OCTOBER 2013 AND BECAME DIRECTOR IN JANUARY 2014. HE WAS NOT CONVERSANT WITH THE FINANC IAL AFFAIRS OF THE COMPANY OF ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APP EAL. HE WAS NOT IN A POSITION TO GIVE EVEN ONE REASON FOR I NVESTING IN THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WITHOUT ANY RETURN AND ACTING IN AN IMPROBABLE MANNER AGAINST THE WISDOM OF A NORMAL AN D PRUDENT PERSON. THE A.O. NOTED THAT IN ANSWER TO Q UESTION NO. 24, HE HAS ADMITTED THAT M/S HILLRIDGE INVESTM ENT LTD HAS GIVEN THE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES OF RS.40 LACS A S SHARE MONEY TO ASSESSEE COMPANY IN ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER 8 ITA.NO.1565/DEL./2018 M/S. RKG HOUSING (P) LTD., NEW DELHI. APPEAL. THE A.O, THEREFORE, TREATED THE AMOUNT OF R S.40 LAKHS AS BOGUS ACCOMMODATION ENTRY AND ADDITION WAS MADE OF THIS AMOUNT AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. THE A.O. ALSO NOTED THAT AS PER THE MODUS OPERANDI FOLLOWED BY TH E ENTRY OPERATORS, THEY WERE CHARGING COMMISSION RANGING BE TWEEN 0.25% TO 1% FOR THEIR SERVICES OF CHANNELISING UNDI SCLOSED INCOME OF THE BENEFICIARIES THROUGH THEIR BANK ACCO UNTS. THE A.O, THEREFORE MADE THE ADDITION OF RS.20,000/- BEI NG 0.5% OF THE AMOUNT INVOLVED AND MADE THE ADDITION UNDER SECTION 69C OF THE I.T. ACT ON ACCOUNT OF EXPENDITURE FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. THE A.O, THEREFORE, COMPUTED T HE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.40,19,460/-. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED T HE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT AS WELL AS ADDITION ON MERIT BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). HOWEVER, THE APPEAL OF ASSES SEE HAS BEEN DISMISSED. 3. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS CHALLENG ED THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 148 O F THE I.T. ACT, ADDITION OF RS.40 LAKHS UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE I.T. ACT AND ADDITION OF RS.20,000/- UNDER SECTION 69C O F THE I.T. ACT. 9 ITA.NO.1565/DEL./2018 M/S. RKG HOUSING (P) LTD., NEW DELHI. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE OF BOT H THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. 5. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DID NOT ARGUE WITH REGARD TO ISSUE OF REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT . THE LD. CIT(A) CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE NOTED THAT THE OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE WITH REGARD TO INITIATION OF REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147/148 O F THE I.T. ACT ARE WITHOUT ANY BASIS, THEREFORE, CLAIM OF ASSESSEE HAS BEEN REJECTED. THE A.O. HAS REPRODUCED THE REAS ONS RECORDED FOR RE-ASSESSMENT IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WHICH ARE ALSO REPRODUCED IN THIS ORDER HEREINABOVE. THE REASONS CLEARLY SHOW THAT THERE WAS A CREDIBLE INFORMATION AND MATERIAL WITH THE A.O. TO SHOW THAT ASSESSEE HAS RE CEIVED ACCOMMODATION ENTRY, THEREFORE, REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT IS WHOLLY JUSTIFIED IN THE MATTER. SINCE THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DID NOT ARGUE THIS GROUND, I DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE INITIATION OF RE-ASSESSMENT PROCEEDI NGS. THEREFORE, THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. 10 ITA.NO.1565/DEL./2018 M/S. RKG HOUSING (P) LTD., NEW DELHI. 6. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, AS REGARDS TH E OTHER ADDITIONS ON MERITS SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE F ILED INCOME TAX RECORD OF THE INVESTOR, THEIR COPY OF BA NK ACCOUNT, ROC RECORD AND CONFIRMATION BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. PB-93 IS AFFIDAVIT OF THE DIRECT OR OF THE INVESTOR CONFIRMING THE TRANSACTION WITH THE ASSESS EE. PB-46 IS REPLY BEFORE A.O. PB-87 IS P & L A/C, BALANCE-SH EET OF THE INVESTOR COMPANY. PB-92 IS BANK STATEMENTS OF THE I NVESTOR COMPANY. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT A.O. HAS RELIED UPON ANSWER TO QUESTION NO.24 OF THE STATEMENT OF SHRI N AVEEN KUMAR, DIRECTOR OF THE INVESTOR COMPANY TO IGNORE T HE OTHER QUESTIONS. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT TOTALITY OF ALL TH E ANSWERS SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELO W. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT SINCE INVESTOR COMPANY HAS CONFI RMED MAKING INVESTMENT IN ASSESSEE COMPANY, THEREFORE, A DDITION SHOULD HAVE BEEN DELETED. 7. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. D.R. RELIED UPON THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS : 1. PCIT VS. NRA IRON & STEEL (P.) LTD., [2019] 103 TAXMANN.COM 48 (SC). 11 ITA.NO.1565/DEL./2018 M/S. RKG HOUSING (P) LTD., NEW DELHI. 2. PCIT VS. NDR PROMOTERS PVT. LTD., 2019-TIOL- 172-HC-DEL-IT. 3. CIT VS. NIPUN BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS (P.) LTD., 3 50 ITR 407 (DEL.). 4. CIT VS. NOVA PROMOTERS & FINLEASE (P) LTD., 342 ITR 169 (DEL.). 5. CIT VS. N.R. PORTFOLIO PVT. LTD., 29 TAXMANN.COM 291 (DEL.) 6. CIT VS. MAF ACADEMY (P) LTD., 361 ITR 258 (DEL.) . 8. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE A.O. INITIATED THE RE- ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BECAUSE INFORMATION WAS RECE IVED THAT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERAT ION IN THE CASE OF SHRI S.K. JAIN AND SHRI VIRENDER JAIN, VARI OUS INCRIMINATING MATERIAL WAS FOUND THAT THEY HAVE BEE N PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES THROUGH VARIOUS OTH ER COMPANIES. IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE, IT WAS FOUN D THAT ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES ON TWO DATES I.E., ON 01.02.2007 AND 08.02.2007 FROM M/S.HILLRID GE 12 ITA.NO.1565/DEL./2018 M/S. RKG HOUSING (P) LTD., NEW DELHI. INVESTMENT LTD., FOR A SUM OF RS.20 LAKHS EACH [RS. 40 LAKHS]. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO PRODUCE THE EVIDE NCE IN SUPPORT OF THE GENUINE TRANSACTION. THE A.O. ON PER USAL OF BANK A/C OF THE INVESTOR FOUND THAT THERE HAVE BEEN REGULAR DEBIT AND CREDIT ENTRIES EQUIVALENT OF THE AMOUNT W ITHIN SPAN OF 23 DAYS WHICH IS COMMON IN THE CASE OF ENTR Y PROVIDERS. THE A.O, THEREFORE, NOTED THAT ENTRIES I N THE BANK A/C OF THE INVESTOR CLEARLY SHOW THAT THERE WAS NO GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION IN THE MATTER AND AS SESSEE FAILED TO PROVE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE INVESTOR. T HERE WAS NO SUFFICIENT BALANCE AND CHEQUES HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE BENEFICIARIES WHICH ARE CLEARED BY WAY OF TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM ASSOCIATED CONCERNS. THE A.O. ASKED THE ASSESS EE TO PRODUCE ONE OF THE DIRECTOR OF THE INVESTOR COMPANY TO CHECK THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION IN THE MAT TER. SHRI NAVEEN KUMAR, ONE OF THE DIRECTOR OF M/S. HILLRIDGE INVESTMENT LTD., (INVESTOR) WAS PRODUCED BEFORE A.O . AND HIS STATEMENT WAS RECORDED ON OATH. COPY OF HIS STATEME NT IS FILED ON RECORD IN WHICH HE HAS STATED THAT HE JOIN ED THIS COMPANY AS AN ACCOUNTANT IN OCTOBER, 2013 AND BECOM E 13 ITA.NO.1565/DEL./2018 M/S. RKG HOUSING (P) LTD., NEW DELHI. DIRECTOR IN JANUARY, 2014. HE WAS NOT CONVERSANT WI TH THE FINANCIAL AFFAIRS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IN ASSESS MENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL. HE WAS ALSO NOT IN A POSITION TO GIVE ANY REASONS FOR INVESTING IN ASSESSEE COMPANY WITHOUT A NY RETURN AND ACTING IN AN IMPROBABLE MANNER AGAINST T HE WISDOM OF A NORMAL PRUDENT PERSON. MOST OF THE QUES TIONS HE DID NOT ANSWER. IN ANSWER TO QUESTION NO.24, HE HAS ADMITTED THAT M/S. HILLRIDGE INVESTMENT LTD., HAS G IVEN ACCOMMODATION ENTRY OF RS.40 LAKHS TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IN ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL. AT THE END OF HIS STATEMENT, HE HAS ADMITTED THAT HE HAS SIGNED THE STATEMENT VOLUNTARILY AND WITHOUT ANY PRESSURE OR F EAR. DURING THE COURSE OF ARGUMENTS, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS REFERRED TO PB-87 WHICH IS P & L A/C O F INVESTOR COMPANY AND HAS SUBMITTED THAT IN ASSESSME NT YEAR UNDER APPEAL, THE INVESTOR HAS TOTAL INCOME OF RS.7,24,369.50PS FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31.03.2007. LEA RNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO ADMITTED BY REFERRING TO THIS PAGE THAT ULTIMATELY THERE IS A LOSS TO THE INVESTO R COMPANY IN ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL AS WELL AS IN SUBSE QUENT 14 ITA.NO.1565/DEL./2018 M/S. RKG HOUSING (P) LTD., NEW DELHI. ASSESSMENT YEARS ENDING ON 31.03.2008. THESE FACTS CLEARLY SUPPORT THE FINDINGS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW THAT ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO PROVE THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE INV ESTOR AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION IN THE MATTER. THE L D. D.R. ALSO REFERRED TO BANK STATEMENTS OF THE INVESTOR CO MPANY, COPY OF WHICH IS FILED IN THE PAPER BOOK TO SHOW TH AT BEFORE GIVING ACCOMMODATION ENTRY TO THE ASSESSEE, THERE W AS NEGLIGIBLE BALANCE IN THE ACCOUNT OF THE INVESTOR C OMPANY. THESE FACTS COUPLED WITH THE STATEMENT OF THE DIREC TOR OF THE INVESTOR COMPANY CLEARLY SHOW THAT M/S. HILLRIDGE INVESTMENT LTD., HAS GIVEN ACCOMMODATION ENTRY OF R S.40 LAKHS TO THE ASSESSEE. THE DECISIONS RELIED UPON BY THE LD. D.R, THUS, CLEARLY SUPPORTS THE FINDING OF FACT REC ORDED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE WAS NOT ABLE TO POINT-OUT ANY ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW FOR MAKING THE ADDITION OF RS.40 LAKHS AND RS.20,000/-. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASES OF DURGA PRASAD MORE 82 ITR 540 (SC) AND SUMATI DAYAL 214 ITR 801 (SC) HELD THAT COURTS AND TRIBUNALS HAVE TO JUDGE THE EVIDENCE BEFORE THEM BY APPLYING THE TEST OF HU MAN 15 ITA.NO.1565/DEL./2018 M/S. RKG HOUSING (P) LTD., NEW DELHI. PROBABILITIES. IF THE SAID TEST IS APPLIED IN THIS MATTER, IT CLEARLY ESTABLISH THAT ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO PROVE THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE INVESTOR AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION IN THE MATTER. WE, THEREFORE, DO NOT FI ND ANY MERIT IN THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE SAME IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 9. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF ASSESSEE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DELHI, DATED 2 ND SEPTEMBER, 2019 VBP/- COPY TO 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) CONCERNED 4. CIT CONCERNED 5. D.R. ITAT SMC BENCH 6. GUARD FILE //BY ORDER// ASST. REGISTRAR : ITAT : DELHI BENCHES : DELHI. 16 ITA.NO.1565/DEL./2018 M/S. RKG HOUSING (P) LTD., NEW DELHI. DATE OF DICTATION 20.08.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT ORDER IS PLACED BEFOR E THE DICTATION MEMBER 21.08.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVAL DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P S 02.09.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATION MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 02.09.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. P.S. 02.09.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT 02.09.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 03. 09.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER.