ITO, New Delhi V. M/s. Famiee India, New Delhi

ITA 2280/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4179 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-11-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 23-11-2016
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 16-04-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SUBHASH KHANNA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : SMC-1 : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.2280/DEL/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 ITO, WARD-50(1), E-2, CIVIC CENTRE, MINTO ROAD, NEW DELHI. VS. FAMIEE INDIA, 12/7, WEST PATEL NAGAR, NEW DELHI. PAN: AACFF1165H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SUBHASH KHANNA, CA DEPARTMENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 23.11.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23.11.2016 ORDER THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE RELATING TO THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2010- 11 ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT (APPE ALS) ON 05.01.2015. 2. THE FIRST GROUND IS AGAINST THE DELETION OF ADDI TION OF RS.9,50,000/. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THIS GROUND ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FIRM FILED ITS ITA NO.2280/DEL/2015 2 RETURN DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,07,613/-. ON PERUSAL OF THE DETAILS, IT WAS OBSERVED THAT SOME OF THE PARTNERS MADE ADDI TIONS TO THEIR RESPECTIVE CAPITAL ACCOUNTS. EXCEPT SHRI YOGESH KU MAR BANSAL, ALL OTHER PARTNERS INTRODUCED FRESH CAPITALS VIZ., SHRI ASHOK KUMAR, RS.3,50,000/-, SHRI KANHIYA LAL SHARMA, RS.3 LAC AN D SHRI SANTHOSH KUMAR SINGH, RS.3 LAC. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY DETAI LS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE AO MADE ADDITION AMOUNTING TO RS.9,50 ,000/-. THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED NECESSARY DETAILS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), WHO SENT SUCH DETAILS TO THE AO FOR COMMENTS. THE AO, IN TU RN, SUBMITTED REMAND REPORT. BASED ON SUCH REMAND REPORT AND THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSIONS, THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION. THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED AGAINST THIS DELETION OF ADDITION. 3. I HAVE HEARD THE LD. AR AND PERUSED THE RELEVA NT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THERE IS NO APPEARANCE FROM THE SIDE OF THE REVENUE . AS SUCH, I AM PROCEEDING TO DISPOSE OFF THIS APPEAL EX PARTE QUA THE DEPARTMENT. IT IS NOTICED FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE F IRM CAME INTO EXISTENCE ON 11.8.2009 AND THE ABOVE REFERRED THREE PARTNERS INTRODUCED ITA NO.2280/DEL/2015 3 CAPITAL TO THE TUNE OF RS.3,71,000/- AND RS.3 LAC E ACH. THE FIRM WAS DISSOLVED AFTER DISPUTE AMONGST THE PARTNERS ON 30. 11.2010. THE ACCOUNTS WERE SETTLED AS PER THE DISSOLUTION DEED A ND RETIRING PARTNERS, NAMELY, THE THREE PERSONS IN RESPECT OF WHOM THE AD DITION HAS BEEN MADE, GOT THEIR RESPECTIVE SHARES FROM THE FIRM AND RETIRED. ALL THE THREE PARTNERS ADMITTED DURING THE COURSE OF REMAND PROCE EDINGS BEFORE THE AO THAT THEY HAD CONTRIBUTED THE CAPITAL AS WAS DIS CLOSED IN THE BOOKS OF THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM. NOT ONLY THAT, THEY ALSO DIS CLOSED THE SOURCE OF SUCH CAPITAL CONTRIBUTION, WHICH WAS LARGELY OUT OF WITHDRAWALS FROM THEIR OTHER CONCERNS. THESE FACTS HAVE BEEN ADMITTE D BY THE AO IN THE REMAND REPORT. HE, HOWEVER, CHOSE NOT TO AGREE WIT H THE ASSESSEE ON CERTAIN HYPER TECHNICAL GROUNDS. WHEN THESE THREE PARTNERS DECLARED THEIR RESPECTIVE SOURCES OF INVESTMENT IN THE PARTN ERSHIP FIRM AMOUNTING TO RS.3,50,000/- AND RS.3 LAC EACH, AND THIS FACT W AS ALSO RECOGNIZED BY THE AO IN THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS, IN MY CONSIDERED OPINION, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THIS ADDITION. TH IS GROUND IS NOT ALLOWED. ITA NO.2280/DEL/2015 4 4. THE ONLY OTHER GROUND IS AGAINST THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.27,49,116/- IN RESPECT OF SUNDRY CREDITORS APPEA RING IN THE BOOKS OF PARTNERSHIP FIRM. THE AO MADE THIS ADDITION IN RESP ECT OF TWO SUNDRY CREDITORS, NAMELY, M/S HARSH ENTERPRISES WITH OUTST ANDING BALANCE OF RS.7,22,987/- AND M/S KRISHNA TEX PRINT WITH THE O UTSTANDING BALANCE OF RS.20,26,129/- ON THE GROUND THAT THE CONFIRMATI ONS WERE NOT FILED. DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE FURN ISHED DETAILS IN RESPECT OF THESE TRADE CREDITORS. IN THE REMAND PR OCEEDINGS, THERE WAS NO DISPUTE THAT THE AMOUNTS APPEARING IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WERE, IN FACT, OUTSTANDING TO THESE TWO TR ADE CREDITORS THE LD. CIT(A) GOT CONVINCED AND DELETED THE ADDITION. 5. AFTER HEARING THE LD. AR AND PERUSING THE RELEV ANT MATERIAL ON RECORD, IT IS OBSERVED THAT BOTH THE TRADE CREDITOR S CONFIRMED DURING THE COURSE OF REMAND PROCEEDINGS THAT THE AMOUNT OUTSTA NDING IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM WAS RIGHTLY DUE TO THEM. THAT BEING THE POSITION, THERE CAN BE NO QUESTION OF ANY ADDITION. I, THEREFORE, UPHOLD THE IMPUGNED ORDER. ITA NO.2280/DEL/2015 5 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23.11.201 6. SD/- [R.S. SYAL] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED, 23.11.2016. DK COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT AR, ITAT, NEW DELHI.