V.D. Promoters (P) Ltd., New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 182/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 69696 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 11 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-12-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 19-12-2013
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 12-01-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAMEER SHARMA SENIOR
• Assessee Lawyers: A K SHARMA
• Keywords: Unexplained investment

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH H : NEW DELHI) SHRI U.B.S. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND BEFORE SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.182/DEL./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05) ITA NO.905/DEL./2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05) M/S. V.D. PROMOTERS (P) LIMITED, VS. ACIT, CC 12, B 109, DEFENCE COLONY, NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI 110 024. ( PAN : AAHCS7904F) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI A.K. SHARMA, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : SHRI SAMEER SHARMA, SENIOR DR ORDER PER B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : ITA NO.182/DEL/2010 EMANATES FROM THE ORDER OF CIT (APPEALS)-I, NEW DELHI DATED 13.11.2009. 2. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE TWO ADDITIONS, VIZ., ONE OF RS.86,50,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED ADVANCES AND RS.1,10,00,0 00/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT. THE CIT (A) HAS CONFIRMED T HE ADDITION. NOW, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US BY TAKING THE FOLLO WING GROUNDS :- ITA NO.182/DEL./2010 ITA NO.905/DEL./2013 2 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT APPEAL IS ARBIT RARY, UNJUSTIFIED AND BAD IN LAW. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW, THE LEARNED CIT APPEAL ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.86,50,000/- U/S 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW, THE LEARNED CIT (APPEAL) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMIN G THE ADDITION OF RS.110,00,000/- U/S 69 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AS ALL EGED UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THESE INVESTMENTS ARE DULY RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WHICH ARE DU LY AUDITED BY THE AUTHORIZED CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND, MODIFY THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, BOTH THE SIDES HAD AGREE D THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMANDED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO BE DECIDED DE NOVO AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO GIVING THE LIBERTY TO ASSESSEE TO FILE THE EVIDENCES BEFORE HIM. 4. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIE S BELOW AND CONSIDERING THE PLEADINGS OF BOTH THE SIDES, WE HOLD THAT THE R ELEVANT FACTS HAVE NOT COME ON RECORD. IN VIEW OF THIS, WE FIND IT APPROPRIATE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY THAT THE MATTER REQUIRES A RELOOK AT THE LEV EL OF ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, KEEPING THESE FACTS IN VIEW, WE SET ASID E THE ISSUES TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO BE DECIDED DE NOVO. 5. ITA NO.905/DEL/2013 EMANATES FROM THE ORDER OF T HE CIT (APPEALS)- 19, NEW DELHI DATED 23.11.2012 IN THE PENALTY PROCE EDINGS U/S 271(1)(C) ON ITA NO.182/DEL./2010 ITA NO.905/DEL./2013 3 THE ADDITIONS MADE IN THE QUANTUM APPEAL, WHICH WAS CONFIRMED BY THE CIT (A). SINCE WE HAVE RESTORED THE QUANTUM APPEAL TO T HE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, THE ISSUE OF LEVYING PENALTY U/ S 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 IS ALSO RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSES SING OFFICER. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 19 TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2013 AFTER CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING. SD/- SD/- (U.B.S. BEDI) (B.C. MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED THE 19 TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2013 TS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A) 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.