ITO, New Delhi V. M/s Raghvi Fincance Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2041/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3317 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 24-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 25-04-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: F R MEENA
• Keywords: Accommodation entries; Onus to prove
• Section: 133(6); 68; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH F NEW DELHI BEFORE : S HRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2041/DEL./2011 ASSTT. YEAR : 2003 - 04 INCOME - TAX OFFICER, VS. RAGHVI FINCANCE LTD., WARD 15(1), NEW DELHI. 10, COMMUNITY CENTRE II, ASHOK VIHAR PHASE - II NEW DELHI. [PAN: AAACR 5979F] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI F.R. MEENA, SR. DR RESP ONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 24.04.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02. 0 5 .2017 ORDER PER L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: BY MEANS OF THIS APPEAL, THE REVENUE HAS CHALLENGED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - XVIII, NEW DELHI DATED 02.02.2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 200 3 - 04 . THE REVENUE HAS CHALLENGED THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.35,00,000/ - MADE BY THE AO U/S. 68 OF THE IT ACT ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : '1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTAN CES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 35,00,000/ - MADE BY THE A.O. U/S 68 OF THE IT. ACT, 1961, ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT (A) ER RED IN IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME ITA NO. 2041/DEL./2011 2 COURT IN THE CASE OF LOVELY EXPORTS (P) LTD. 216 CTR 199 (SC) CANNOT BE EXTENDED TO A SITUATION WHERE A MECHANISM HAS BEEN FORMED TO INTRODUCE UNACCOUNTED MONEY IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WITH THE HELP OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRY PROVIDERS WHICH HAS BEEN EXPOSED BY DEEP AND DETAILED INVESTIGATION CARRIED OUT BY THE INVESTIGATION WING OF THE DEPARTMENT. MOREOVER, THE FACTS IN THE PRESENT CASE ARE DISTINGUISHABLE FROM THE ABOVE CITED CASE IN SO FAR AS THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE ANY OF THE PRINCIPAL OFFICERS/DIRECTORS OF COMPANIES FOR EXAMINATION WHEREAS IN THE CASE CITED ABOVE THE A.O. NEVER ASKED THE ASSESSEE COMPANY TO PRODUCE ANY OF THE SHARE APPLICANTS FOR CROSS EXAMINATION. T HE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE RESPONDENT FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 27.11.2003 DECLARING INCOME OF ONLY RS.4380/ - WHICH WAS PROCESSED U/S. 143(1) ON 12.12.2003. SUBSEQUENTLY, ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM DIT (INV.), BASED ON VIT AL INVESTIGATIONS BY THEM, THE AO NOTICED THAT THE RESPONDENT D URIN G THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION RECEIVED A SUM OF RS.35,00,000/ - AS CREDITED TO ITS BANK ACCOUNTS FROM FOLLOWING SEVEN PARTIES AS ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES : (I). M/S. PRAGATI FINSEC LTD., (I I). M/S. RGV FINVEST P. LTD., (III). M/S. CENTENARY SOFTWARE P. LTD., (IV). M/S. PERFORMANCE TRADING & INVESTMENT, (V). M/S. SHIVAM SOFTECH LTD., (VI). M/S. KOHINOOR OIL MILLS LTD. (VII). M/S. SHIMMER MARKETING P. LTD. ON THE BASIS OF THIS INFORMATI ON, THE AO REOPENED THE CASE OF THE RESPONDENT BY ISSUING NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE ACT AND RECORDING REASONS. IN RESPONSE, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THE ABOVE AMOUNT AS SHARE CAPITAL MONEY ITA NO. 2041/DEL./2011 3 RECEIVED FROM AFORESAID COMPANIES/PARTIES . IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSE SSEE HAD RECEIVED THE SHARE APPLICATION FROM THE COMPANIES AS REFERR E D IN THE REASONS RECORDED AND SHARES WERE ALLOTTED TO THEM ON 31.03.2003 WHICH STANDS CORROBORATED FROM THE FACT THAT THE ISSUED AND SUBSCRIBED CAPITAL OF THE COMPANY HAD ALSO BEEN INCREASED DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED SOME EVIDENCES LIKE PAN, DETAILS OF ALLOTMENT OF SHARES IN FORM NO. 2, CONFIRMATIONS ETC. OF THE ABOVE CREDITORS. RELYING ON THE DECISION OF HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. LOVELY EXPORT S P. LTD., 216 CTR (SC) 195 ., THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT NO ADDITION CAN, THUS, BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE RESPONDENT U/S. 68 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED SUMMONS T O THE ALLEGED SHARE APPLICANTS U/S. 133(6), BUT THE SAME RETURNED BACK WITH THE POSTAL REMARKS NO SUCH PERSON . THE AO ALSO DIRECTED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE ANY OF THE PRINCIPAL OFFICER (S) OR DIRECTOR (S) OF THE ABOVE COMPANIES, BUT THE ASSESSEE FAILED T O DO SO. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER CONSIDERING THE REPLY OF ASSESSEE AND ENUMERATING THE MODUS OPERANDI OF ENTRY PROVIDERS AND THEIR BENEFICIARIES, TREATED THE IMPUGNED AMOUNT OF RS.35,00,000/ - AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES AND THEREFORE ADDED THE SAME TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO. 2041/DEL./2011 4 AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE AO, THE RESPONDENT CARRIED THE MATTER TO THE LD. CIT(A) IN APPEAL AND CHALLENGED THE RE - ASSESSMENT ORDER BOTH ON VALIDITY OF REOPENING AS WELL AS ON MERITS OF AD DITION. THE LD. CIT(A) REJECTED THE LEGAL GROUND AND HELD THE INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S. 148/147 AS VALID. HE, HOWEVER, AFTER ACCEPTING VARIOUS CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS AND RELYING ON VARIOUS DECISIONS INCLUDING THE DECISION OF HON BLE SUP REME COURT IN LOVELY EXPORT S CASE (SUPRA), ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AND DELETED THE IMPUGNED ADDITION. THE REVENUE WAS NOT SATISFIED WITH THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), HENCE, THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. DR REITERATED THE CONTENTS OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND SUBMITTED THAT THE AO MADE ENQUIRIES IN THE MATTER AND OBTAINED BANK ACCOUNTS OF THE ALLEGED SHARE APPLICANTS. ON PERUSAL OF BANK ACCOUNTS, HE FOUND THAT THERE IS A UNIFORM PATTERN TO THE DEPOSITS/WITHDRAWALS OF THE AMOUNTS. THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO REBUT THE CONTENTION OF THE AO THAT INVARIABLY THE PAYMENTS OUT OF THE BANK ACCOUNTS ARE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDED BY THE DEPOSITS OF EQUIVALENT AMOUNTS IN THE SAID ACCOUNT S EI THER IN CASH OR THROUGH CHEQUE/TRANSFER ENTRIES. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALSO NOT RECORDED ANY FINDING IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AGAINST THE CONCLUSION OF AO THAT UNLESS THE IDENTITY AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE ENTITY AND THE TRANSACTIONS REPRESENTED ITA NO. 2041/DEL./2011 5 BY THE ENTRIES IN THE BANK ARE CORRELATED WITH THE BUSINESS ACTIVITY AND THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE SAID ENTITY, THE ABOVE PATTERN AND THE FREQUENCY OF DEPOSITS AND WITHDRAWALS AT SHORT INTERVALS LENDS FURTHER CREDENCE TO THE FACT OF THE ACCOUNT BEING USED ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. THE ALLEGED SHARE APPLICANTS WERE NOT FOUND IN EXISTENCE AS PER REPORT OF THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES AND THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE ANY OF THE PRINCIPAL OFFICER OR DIRECTOR OF THE SAID CREDITORS. THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE IMPUGNED ADDITION , AS NONE OF THE INGREDIENTS OF SECTION 68 STOOD SATISFIED BY THE ASSESSEE . HE, THEREFORE, URGED FOR SUSTENANCE OF THE ORDER OF THE AO . 5. NONE IS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US DE SPITE THE DATE OF HEARING WAS FIXED ON THE WRITTEN REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE S COUNSEL. NO ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION HAS COME ON RECORD FROM THE SIDE OF ASSESSEE. WE, THEREFORE, FIND NO ALTERNATIVE EXCEPT TO DECIDE THE APPEAL ON MERITS ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL S AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND AFTER HEARING THE SUBMISSIONS OF LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE. 6. HAVING CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DR, THE CONTENTS OF THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW, THE ENQUIR Y MADE BY THE AO WITH RESPECT TO EXISTENCE OF SHAR E APPLICANTS/LENDERS AND THE GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTIONS ITA NO. 2041/DEL./2011 6 MADE THEREWITH , WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS. IT IS NOTABLE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS LEGALLY OBLIGED TO SATISFY THE THREE INGREDIENTS OF SECTION 68, NAM ELY, IDENTITY & CREDITWORTHINESS OF CREDITORS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. IN THE INSTANT CASE, I T IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE ALLEGED CREDITORS WERE NOT FOUND IN EXISTENCE AS PER REMARKS OF THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES GIVEN ON THE SUMMONS ISSUED BY THE AO TO THEM U/S. 133(6) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE ALSO DID NOT CHALLENGE THAT THE ADDRESS ON WHICH SAID SUMMONS WERE SENT WAS NOT CORRECT. IT IS ALSO AN ADMITTED FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE ANY OF THE CREDITORS OR THEIR PRINCIPAL OFFICERS OR THEIR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT BEFORE THE AO TO SUPPORT THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS DESPITE THE AO REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO DO THE SAME. TH E ASSESSEE ALSO DID NOT ASSIGN ANY REASON AS TO WHY HE FAILED TO DO SO. A PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER REVEALS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WHILE DELETING THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS , HAS RELIED ON THE EVIDENCES FILED BEFORE HIM IN THE SHAPE OF CONFIRMATIONS, COPY OF R ETURN OF INCOME, THEIR PAN CARD, BANK STATEMENTS OBTAINED BY AO , SHARE ALLOTMENT DETAILS ETC. THE LD. CIT(A), HOWEVER, UTTERLY FAILED TO CONSIDER THE CRUCIAL FACT THAT ONCE THE ASSESSEE COULD OBTAIN SUCH DOCUMENT ARY EVIDENCES FROM THE PAYEE COMPANIES , WHY HE FAILED TO ASSIGN ANY REASON FOR HIS INABILITY TO PRODUCE ANY OF THE PARTIES OR THEIR PRINCIPAL OFFICERS FOR EXAMINATION BEFORE THE AO. THE SUMMONS ISSUED TO THEM STOOD ITA NO. 2041/DEL./2011 7 RETURNED UNSERVED WITH THE REMARK THAT NO SUCH PERSON WAS FOUND EXISTING AT THE AD DRESS GIVEN. NO OTHER ADDRESS WAS POINTED OUT BY ASSESSEE OTHERWISE THAN THAT ON WHICH THE SUMMONS WERE ISSUED. AS FAR AS THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, WE FIND THAT IN THE PRESENT SCENARIO, SUCH DOCUMENTAR Y EVIDENCE CANNOT BE RELIED UPON WHICH DID NOT RENDER ANY HELP TO CROSS VERIFY THE IMPUGNED TRANSACTIONS AND ARE AGAINST THE RESULT OF GROUND LEVEL ENQUIRY. IN OUR OPINION THE PERIPHERAL DOCUMENTS IN THE SHAPE OF PAN, SO CALLED ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RETURNS DO NOT GO TO PROVE THE IDENTITY AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE INVESTORS COMPANIES, PARTICULARLY WHEN THE ENTITIES IN QUESTION WERE NOT FOUND TO BE EXISTING ON THE GIVEN ADDRESSES AND THAT NONE OF THE PARTIES WERE PRODUCED NOR WAS THERE ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD TO REBUT THE OBJECTIONS OF THE AO REGARDING CAPACITY OF THE ALLEGED INVESTORS TO MAKE THE INVESTMENT. SIMILARLY, MERE PAYMENT BY ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE IS NOT SACROSANCT NOR CAN IT MAKE A NON - GENUINE TRANSACTION GENUINE. THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF VARIOUS ENTITI ES SHOW UNIFORM PATTERN OF TRANSACTIONS AND THAT INVARIABLY , THE ISSUE OF CHEQUES IS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDED BY THE DEPOSITS OF EQUIVALENT AMOUNTS IN THE ACCOUNT EITHER IN CASH OR THROUGH CHEQUE/TRANSFER ENTRIES. IN SUCH PECULIAR CIRCUMSTANCES, UN LESS THE TRA NSACTIONS REPRESENTED BY ITA NO. 2041/DEL./2011 8 THE ENTRIES IN THE BANK ACCOUNT S ARE CORRELATED WITH THE BUSINESS ACTIVITIES AND THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE SAID ENTIT IES , WE DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICATION TO DISREGARD THE FINDING OF THE AO THAT THE ABOVE PATTERN AND THE FREQUENC Y OF DEPOSITS AND WITHDRAWALS AT SHORT INTERVALS WOULD RENDER THE ACCOUNTS, HAVING BEEN USED ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES AND THEREFORE, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF CREDITS OR THE TRANSACTIONS TO BE GENUINE. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS RELIED ON VARIOUS DECISIONS INCLUDING THE DECISION OF HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF LOVELY EXPORTS (SUPRA), WHICH ARE DISTINGUISHABLE ON THE FACTS ATTENDING TO THE PRESENT CASE. HOWEVER, OUR AFORESAID VIEW STANDS F ORTIFIED BY THE DECISION OF HON BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE CIT VS. N. TARIKA PROPERTIES INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. (2014) 264 CTR 472(DEL.), WHERE IN THE IDENTICAL FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, THE HON BLE COURT AFTER CONSIDERING THE DECISION OF HON BL E SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF LOVELY EXPORT PVT. LTD. (SUPRA) , HAS HELD AS UNDER : 26. WE HAVE FURTHER HELD THAT THE COURT OR TRIBUNAL SHOULD BE CONVINCED ABOUT THE IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. THE ONUS TO PROVE THE THREE FACTUM IS ON THE ASSESSEE AS THE FACTS ARE WITHIN THE PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE AS SESSEE. MERE PRODUCTION OF INCORPORATION DETAILS, PAN NUMBERS OR INCOME TAX RETURNS MAY NOT BE SUFFICIENT WHEN SURROUNDING AND ATTENDING FACTS PREDICATE A COVER UP. THE PRODUCTION OF INCORPORATION DETAILS, PAN NUMBERS OR INCOME TAX DETAILS MAY INDICATE TOW ARDS COMPLETION OF PAPER WORK OR DOCUMENTATION BUT GENUINENESS, CREDITWORTHINESS AND IDENTITY OF INVESTMENT AND THE INVESTORS ITA NO. 2041/DEL./2011 9 ARE DEEPER AND OBTRUSIVE THAN MERE COMPLETION OF PAPER WORK OR DOCUMENTATION. 27. AS WE HAVE HELD THAT PAN NUMBERS ARE ALLOTTED O N THE BASIS OF APPLICATIONS WITHOUT ACTUAL DE FACTO VERIFICATION OF THE IDENTITY OR ASCERTAINMENT OF THE ACTIVE NATURE OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY. PAN NUMBER IS ALLOTTED AS A FACILITY TO REVENUE TO KEEP TRACK OF TRANSACTIONS. THE PAN NUMBER CANNOT BE BLINDLY AND WITHOUT CONSIDERATION OF SURROUNDING CIRCUMSTANCES TREATED AS SUFFICIENTLY DISCLOSING THE IDENTITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL. THE MERE FILING OF SHARE APPLICATION IS NOT ENOUGH AS THE SAID APPLICATION IS NOT AN UNIMPEACHABLE DOCUMENT AND DOES NOT ON ITS OWN PROVE THE GENUINENESS OR AUTHENTICITY OF THE TRANSACTION. IT CAN AT BEST BE TREATED AS A CORROBORATIVE DOCUMENT. SINCE THE SHARE APPLICATION FORM IS NOT AN UNIMPEACHABLE DOCUMENT, IT CANNOT ON ITS OWN BE TREATED AS SUFFICIENT FOR CROSS - VERIFICATION OF THE TRANS ACTION. WE HAVE ALREADY HELD THAT THAT MERE PRODUCTION OF PAN NUMBER OR ASSESSMENT PARTICULARS DOES NOT ESTABLISH THE IDENTITY OF A PERSON. THE IDENTIFICATION OF A PERSON INCLUDES THE PLACE OF WORK, THE STAFF AND THE FACT THAT IT WAS ACTUALLY CARRYING ON B USINESS AND FURTHER RECOGNITION OF THE SAID COMPANY/INDIVIDUAL IN THE EYES OF PUBLIC. 29. THE BANK STATEMENTS OF THE INVESTORS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE FABRICATED AND MISLEADING. THEY OMITTED TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS DEPOSIT OF CASH IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CHEQUES FOR PREPARATION OF PAY ORDERS OR DDS IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE REGARDING SUBSCRIPTION OF ITS SHARE CAPITAL. FALSE EVIDENCE HAD BEEN ADDUCED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS TO GET UNDUE ADVANTAGE OF GIVING COLOUR OF GENUINENESS TO BOGUS ENTRIES THROUGH THE BANK ACCOUNTS. THE DEPOSITS WERE MOSTLY BY CASH. WITH REGARD TO THE SHARE SUBSCRIBED BY M/S. BHAWANI ENGINEERING PVT. LTD. AND M/S. SJ HOSIERY PVT. LTD., THE ASSESSING OFFI CER HAS NOTICED THAT THE PAY ORDER/DDS IN RESPECT OF BOTH THE COMPANIES WERE MADE OUT OF THE BANK ACCOUNT OF M/S. BHAWANI ENGINEERING PVT. LTD. THE AO HAS HELD THAT THE TRANSACTIONS IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS SHOWED THAT THERE WAS A CORRESPONDING WITHDRAWAL OF T HE AMOUNT IN CASH ON THE VERY SAME DAY OF THE CREDITING OF CHEQUES AND THERE WAS IMMEDIATE ISSUANCE OF CHEQUES/DDS ON DEPOSIT OF CASH. 30. THE JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF M/S GANGESHWARI METALS PVT. LTD. (SUPRA), DOES NOT ADVANCE THE CASE OF THE RESPONDENT IN ASMUCH AS IN THE ITA NO. 2041/DEL./2011 10 SAID JUDGMENT IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF CASES, ONE IN WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFICER CARRIES OUT THE EXERCISE WHICH IS REQUIRED IN LAW AND THE OTHER IN WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFICER SITS BACK WITH FOLDED HANDS' TILL THE ASSE SSEE EXHAUSTS ALL THE EVIDENCE OR MATERIAL IN HIS POSSESSION AND THEN COMES FORWARD TO MERELY REJECT THE SAME ON THE PRESUMPTIONS. THE HIGH COURT HELD THAT CASE TO BE FALLING IN THE SECOND CATEGORY. IN THE PRESENT CASE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT SAT BAC K WITH FOLDED HANDS BUT HAS CONDUCTED THE ENQUIRY. HE HAS REQUISITIONED AND EXAMINED THE BANK ACCOUNTS AND FOUND DISCREPANCY IN THE BANK STATEMENT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT AND THE ONES REQUISITIONED. THE SAID JUDGMENT IS CLEARLY NOT APPLICABLE IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE. 31. WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO DISCHARGE THE INITIAL ONUS AND HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO ESTABLISH THE IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE SHARE APPLICANTS AND THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. THE SURROUNDING CIRCUMSTANCES AND INQUIRIES MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WERE SIGNIFICANT BUT THE SAID FINDING THOUGH NOT DISTURBED HAVE BEEN IGNORED. FURTHER THE TRIBUNAL HAS FAILED TO TAKE HOLISTIC VIEW AND HAS RELIED UPON NEUTRAL AND GENERAL EVIDENCE WITHOUT NOTICING OTHER EVIDENCE. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAI D OBSERVATIONS OF HON BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AND THE ATTENDING FACTS OF THE CASE IN HAND, WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO ENDORSE THE CONCLUSIONS REACHED BY THE LD . CIT(A) IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND THEREFORE, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO DESERVES TO BE SUSTAINED. 11. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02.05.2017 . SD/ - SD/ - ( AMIT SHUKLA ) (L.P. SAHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 02.05.2017 *AKS/ -