M/s. Raghupati Leasing and Finance Ltd., New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 235/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 23520114 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-10-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 15-10-2014
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 14-01-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHAMEER SHARMA
• Keywords: Gift; Accommodation entries
• Section: 142(1); 68; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH F, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI J.S. REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 235/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 RAGHUPATI LEASING & FINANCE LTD., VS. ITO, 23, ISHWAR NAGAR, MATHURA ROAD, WARD 15(1), NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. AAACR4318K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. ANOOP SHARMA, ADV. RESPONDENT BY : SH. SHAMEER SHARMA, SR. D R ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 15.11.2012 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XVIII, NEW DELHI FOR A.Y. 2004-05. 2. THE FACTS RELATING TO THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE ARE T HAT THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 01/11/2004 DECLARING NIL INCOME WHICH WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 (HEREINA FTER CALLED THE ACT). IN THIS CASE, THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE DIT(IN V.), THAT DURING THE COURSE OF INVESTIGATION IN THE CASE OF MUKESH GUPTA GROUP ALONG WITH ITS CLOSE CONFIDANTS SHRI RAJAN JASSAL & SHRI SURINDER PAL SINGH, IT WAS FOUND THAT THE GROUP HAD OPERATED MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS IN VA RIOUS BRANCHES TO PLOUGH BACK UNACCOUNTED BLACK MONEY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS OR FOR PERSONAL NEEDS SUCH AS PURCHASE OF ASSETS ETC. IN T HE FORM OF GIFTS, SHARE APPLICATION MONEY, LOANS ETC. DURING THE COURSE OF INVESTIGATIONS BY THE DIT(INV.) IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THE ASSESSEE (ENTR Y TAKERS OR ITA NO. 235/D/2013 RAGHUPATI LEASING & FINANCE LT D. 2 BENEFICIARIES) WHO HAVE UNACCOUNTED MONEY AND WANTE D TO INTRODUCE THE SAME IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WITHOUT PAYING TAX AP PROACHED ANOTHER PERSON I.E. ENTRY OPERATOR AND HANDED OVER CASH (PL US COMMISSION) AND TOOK CHEQUES/DDS/POS. THE CASH WAS DEPOSITED BY TH E ENTRY OPERATOR IN A BANK ACCOUNT EITHER IN HIS OWN NAME OR IN THE NAM E OF RELATIVE/FRIENDS OR OTHER PERSON HIRED BY HIM FOR THE PURPOSE OF OPE NING BANK ACCOUNT. THE ENTRY OPERATOR THEREAFTER ISSUED CHEQUE/DD/PO I N THE NAME OF BENEFICIARY FROM THE SAME ACCOUNT (IN WHICH THE CAS H WAS DEPOSITED) OR ANOTHER ACCOUNT IN WHICH FUNDS WERE TRANSFERRED THR OUGH CLEARING IN TWO OR MORE STAGES. THE BENEFICIARY IN TURN DEPOSITED THESE INSTRUMENTS IN HIS BANK ACCOUNTS AND THE MONEY CAME TO HIS REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IN THE FORM OF GIFT, SHARE APPLICATION MONEY, LOAN ETC . THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS AND THE TRANSACTION LOOKED GENUINE. 3. THE AO NOTICED FROM THE LIST OF ENTRIES THAT THE ASSESSEE M/S RAGHUPATI LEASING & FINANCE LTD. HAS TAKEN THE ACCO MMODATION ENTRIES AMOUNTING TO RS. 30,04,500/- VIDE INSTRUMENT NO. 51 749 DATED 24 TH MAY, 2003 FROM ENTRY PROVIDER NAMELY SHATTARCHI FIN. & L EASING ISSUED BY BANK RATNAKAR KB BRANCH. 4. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID REPORT THE AO IS OF THE VIEW THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT DISCLOSED FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACT S NECESSARY FOR ITS ASSESSMENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR AND THAT A SUM O F RS. 30,04,500/- CHARGEABLE TO TAX HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. ACCORDIN GLY, AFTER RECORDING THE REASONS AND WITH THE APPROVAL OF ADDL. CIT, NOT ICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 25 TH MARCH, 2011 AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE BY SPEED POST. A NOTICE U/S 142(1) ALONG WITH QUESTIONNAIRE WAS ALSO ISSUED ON 16/09/2011 AND SERVED UPON THE A SSESSEE BY THE SPEED POST. IN RESPONSE TO THESE NOTICES THE AUTHO RIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARED BEFORE THE AO AND FILED LE TTER FOR ADJOURNMENT AND THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ADJOURNED. FURTHE R NOTICE U/S 142(1) ITA NO. 235/D/2013 RAGHUPATI LEASING & FINANCE LT D. 3 AND NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE ACT WERE ISSUED ON 17/ 10/2011 AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE BY SPEED POST. AFTER THAT THE SH OW CAUSE NOTICE FOR FINAL OPPORTUNITY WERE ALSO ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE FIXING THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 14/11/2011 IN RESPONSE TO THE SAME THE A UTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE WERE APPEARED AND FI LED PART DETAILS AND CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 21/11/2011 FOR FILING REMAINI NG DETAILS. LATER ON THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO ADJOURNED FOR 30/ 11/2011, 07/12/2011, 12/12/2011 BUT MOST OF THE TIME ASSESSEE REMAINED A BSENT BEFORE THE AO. 5. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING THE A UTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE HIS LETTER DATE D 14/11/2011 SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED RS. 30 LAK HS FROM M/S MIRACULAS CONSTRUCTION P. LTD. UNDER SETTLEMENT OF A DISPUTE SINCE 1995- 96. THE AMOUNT WAS RECOVERABLE FROM HIM AGAINST TH E LEASING CHARGES DUE FROM 1995-96 TO 1997-98. DUE TO THIS NON-PAYME NT, THE ASSESSEE HAS TO SUFFER A MAJOR FINANCE LOSS AND VIRTUALLY HA S TO CLOSE DOWN THIS BUSINESS FROM 1997-98. 6. THE AO PERUSED THE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE A.Y. 1995- 96 FURNISHED BY THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE C OURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING, IT IS FOUND THAT M/S MIRACULAS CONSTRUC TION P. LTD. WAS NOT WORKING OR TRACEABLE AT THAT TIME. HE IS OF THE VI EW THAT FOR THE PAYMENTS OF RS. 30 LACS RECEIVED FROM IT AFTER THE SPAN OF E IGHT YEARS. THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED THAT WHEN TRANSACTIONS WITH M/S MIRACULAS CONSTRUCTION P. LTD. TOOK PLACE IN THE YEAR 1994-95 , THE PARTY WAS AVAILABLE BUT AFTER THE SPAN OF TWO YEARS THE PARTY WAS NOT AVAILABLE. SINCE THE PAYMENT OF RS. 30 LACS WHICH IS GIVEN BY M/S SHATTARCHI FINANCE & LEASING P. LTD. TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE A R OF THE ASSESSEE IS MENTIONED THAT ASSESSEE HAS NO CONNECTION OR DEALIN G WITH M/S SHATTARCHI FIN. & LEASING P. LTD. AND THIS AMOUNT I S CREDITED IN THE BOOKS ITA NO. 235/D/2013 RAGHUPATI LEASING & FINANCE LT D. 4 OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. DURING THE COURSE OF A SSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE PARTY M/S SHA TTARCHI FIN. & LEASING P. LTD. HAS BEEN OBTAINED FROM THE BANK AND THIS AMOUNT OF RS. 30 LACS IS REFLECTED IN THE BANK STATEMENT. 6.1 THE AO CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSE E BUT NOT ACCEPTED THE SAME BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAVE NO DEAL ING WITH M/S SHATTARCHI FIN. & LEASING P. LTD. AND THIS AMOUNT O F RS. 30 LACS WAS RECOVERABLE ONLY FROM M/S MIRACULAS CONSTRUCTION P. LTD. AGAINST THE LEASING CHARGES DUE FROM 1995-96 TO 1997-98. AS M/ S SHATTARCHI FIN. & LEASING P. LTD. FROM WHOM THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED THE AMOUNTS HAVE BEEN SUBJECT TO CERTAIN INVESTIGATIN BY THE INVESTI GATION WINGH, WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN FOUND THAT IT IS NOT CARRYING ON ANY ACTUA L BUSINESS. IT HAS BEEN FOUND TO BE ENGAGED IN ACTIVITIES OF PROVIDING ACCO MMODATION ENTRIES. THE PERSON WHO PROVIDES SUCH ENTRY IS KNOWN AS ENTR Y OPERATOR AND THE PERSON/PARTY TAKING SUCH ENTRY CALLED BENEFICIARY. THE AO OBTAINED THE COPIES OF RELEVANT BANK ACCOUNT OF M/S SHATTARCHI F IN. & LEASING P. LTD. FROM THE BANKS AND FORM THAT THERE IS A UNIFORM PAT TERN TO THE DEPOSITS/WITHDRAWALS OF THE AMOUNTS. INVARIABLY TH E PAYMENTS OUT OF ACCOUNTS ARE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDED BY THE DEPOSITS O F EQUIVALENT AMOUNTS IN THE ACCOUNT EITHER IN CASH OR THROUGH CH EQUE/TRANSFER ENTRIES. THE AO IS OF THE VIEW THAT UNLESS THE IDENTITY AND THE TRANSACTIONS REPRESENTED BY THE ENTRIES IN THE BANK ARE CORRELAT ED WITH THE BUSINESS ACTIVITY AND THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE SAID ENTI TY, THE ABOVE PATTERN AND THE FREQUENCY OF DEPOSITS AND WITHDRAWALS AT IN TERVALS LENDS FURTHER CREDENCE TO THE FACT OF ACCOUNT HAS BEEN USED ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. THE ONUS LAY HEAV ILY ON THE ASSESSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE THE GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION BY E ITHER PROVIDING AND INDEPENDENT THIRD PARTY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF GENU INENESS OF THE TRANSACTION AND THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF M/S SHATTAR CHI FIN. & LEASING P. ITA NO. 235/D/2013 RAGHUPATI LEASING & FINANCE LT D. 5 LTD. BY PRODUCING THE DIRECTOR OF M/S SHATTARCHI FI N. & LEASING P. LTD. WITH PROOF OF AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS WITH THEM IN TH EIR OWN CAPACITY. BUT THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ESTABLIS HED WITH THE PROOF OF EVIDENCE THAT THE TRANSACTION IN DISPUTE IS RELATIN G TO THE BUSINESS ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE AMOUNT O F RS. 30 LACS RECEIVED FROM M/S SHATTARCHI FIN. & LEASING P. LTD. WAS ONLY A CAMOUFLAGE TO INTRODUCE THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ON UNACCOUNTED MONEY INTO THE BUSINESS AND THIS TRANSACTION IS A BOGUS TRANSACTIO N AND IS NOT RELATING TO THE BUSINESS ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE. THE AO AD DED RS. 30 LACS TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY BY PASSING ORDER DAT ED 16/12/2011 U/S 147/143(3) OF THE IT ACT. 6.2 AGGRIEVED BY THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 16/12/2 011 ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTH ORITY WHO VIDE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 15/11/2012 DISMISSED THE APPEAL FILED B Y THE ASSESSEE BY UPHOLDING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 16/12/2011. N OW THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPUGNED O RDER DATED 15/11/2012 PASSED BY THE CIT(APPEALS). 7. AT THE TIME OF HEARING LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSES SEE ONLY ARGUED THAT THE AO HAS WRONGLY MADE THE ADDITION OF RS. 30 LACS AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT PROVIDING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. HE FURTHER STATED THAT AO HAS COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT IN A HURRY MANNER BECAUSE HE IS HAVING A VERY SHORT TIME WITH HIM. SIMILARLY, LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS ALSO DECIDED THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT PROVIDING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNI TY TO THE ASSESSEE. HE REQUESTED THAT MATTER MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE AO TO DECIDE THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE AFRESH UNDER THE LAW AFTER GIVING OPPORTUNI TY TO THE ASSESSEE. 8. ALTHOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED EIGHT GROUNDS O F APPEAL IN THE PRESENT APPEAL BUT AT THE TIME OF HEARING LD. COUNS EL FOR THE ASSESSEE ITA NO. 235/D/2013 RAGHUPATI LEASING & FINANCE LT D. 6 ONLY ARGUED GROUND NO. 1 & 2 IN WHICH THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF RS. 30 LACS U/S 68 OF THE IT ACT AND IN GROUND NO. 2 THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE ORDER OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITY ON THE GROUND THAT THE ALLEGED UNDISCLOSED INCOME ACTU ALLY REPRESENTED DISPUTED SETTLEMENT AMOUNT RECOVERABLE FROM M/S MIR ACULAS CONSTRUCTION P. LTD. AGAINST THE LEASING CHARGES DUE FROM 1995-9 6 TO 1997-98. NO DOUBT THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FIL ED A PAPER BOOK CONTAINING PAGE 1-112 IN WHICH HE HAS ATTACHED (I) AO ORDER DATED 26.03.1998 FOR A.Y. 1995-96 U/S 143(3); (II) CIT(A) ORDER DATED 31.03.1999 FOR A.Y. 1995-96 U/S 250; (III) AO ORDER DATED 28.03.2001 FOR A.Y. 1995-96 U/S 143(3)/250; (IV) CIT(A) ORDER DATE D 07.08.2002 FOR A.Y. 1995-96 U/S 143(3)/250; (V) ITAT ORDER DATED 31.08. 2006 FOR A.Y. 1995- 96; (VI) BALANCE SHEET AND COMPUTATION OF INCOME AS ON 31.03.2003; (VII) BALANCE SHEET AND COMPUTATION OF INCOME AS ON 31.03 .2003; (VIII) COPY OF ACCOUNT OF MIRACULOUS CONST. CO. PVT. LTD.; (IX) COPY OF LEASE AGREEMENT DT. 21/01/1995 WITH MIRACULOUS CONST. CO. P. LTD. 9. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DRAW OUR AT TENTION TOWARDS THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN T HE SHAPE OF PAPER BOOK. HE ONLY ARGUED AS WE HAVE STATED ABOVE. 10. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. DR RELIED UPON THE IMPUGNE D ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. HE FURTHER STAT ED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN THE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES OF RS. 30,04,500/- FROM SHATTARCHI FIN. & LEASING P. LTD. WITH WHOM THE ASSESSEE HAVE NO BU SINESS RELATION. THE AO HAS ALSO MADE AN ENQUIRY AND FOUND THAT M/S SHATTARCHI FIN. & LEASING P. LTD. IS NOT CARRYING ANY ACTUAL BUSINESS . IT HAS BEEN FOUND TO BE ENGAGED IN ACTIVITY OF PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION E NTRIES AS STATED BY THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. LD. DR STRONGLY OP POSED THE REQUEST OF LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FOR SETTING ASIDE THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE TO THE AO FOR SUFFICIENT DECISION BECAUSE THE SUFFICIENT O PPORTUNITY HAS BEEN ITA NO. 235/D/2013 RAGHUPATI LEASING & FINANCE LT D. 7 GIVEN BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITY TO THE ASSESSEE FOR SUBSTANTIATING ITS CLAIM BEFORE THEM. BUT ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO SUBS TANTIATE ITS CLAIM BEFORE THEM. THEREFORE, THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED B Y THE ASSESSEE MAY BE DISMISSED. 11. WE HAVE HEARD THE BOTH PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT RECORD AVAILABLE WITH US. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE INF ORMATION IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE WAS RECEIVED FROM DIT(INV.) THAT THE ASSES SEE COMPANY HAD RECEIVED RS. 30,04,500/- FROM SHATTARCHI FIN. & LEA SING P. LTD. VIDE CHEQUE DATED 04/05/2003 THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WA S REOPENED U/S 148 OF THE IT ACT AFTER FOLLOWING DUE PROCEDURE OF LAW AND STATUTORY NOTICES WERE ISSUED TO THE ASSESEE TO GIVE DETAILED FACTS REGARDING THE ABOVE CREDIT ENTRY. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAME THE AS SESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IT HAD RECEIVED RS. 30 LACS FROM M/S MIRACULOUS CON ST. LIMITED UNDER SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTE WITH HIM SINCE 1995-96 THE AO PERUSED THE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR A.Y. 1995-96 AND FOUND THAT SA ID COMPANY WAS NOT WORKING OR TRACEABLE AT THAT TIME. AS PER ASSESSEE COMPANY BANK ACCOUNT, THE PAYMENT REFLECTED AND HAD BEEN RECEIVE D FROM M/S SHATTARCHI FIN. & LEASING P. LTD. DID NOT HAVE ANY BUSINESS DEALING WITH THIS PARTY. 12. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE REV ENUE AUTHORITY, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS UNABLE TO PROVE THE IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE PARTY FROM WHOM THE AMOUNT HAD BEEN RECEIVED AND COULD NOT CORRELATE IT TO ANY BUSINESS ACTIVITIES. WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE SHAPE OF PAPER BOOK AND WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO PROVE THAT THE DRAFT/CHEQUE OF RS. 30 LACS DATED 24/05/2003 RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FROM M/S SHATTARCHI FIN. & LEASING P. LTD. IS RECOVERY OF THAT FROM M/S MIRACULOUS CONST. P. LTD. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS FAILED TO PROVE THE SOURCE OF RS. 30 LA CS CREDITED IN ITS ITA NO. 235/D/2013 RAGHUPATI LEASING & FINANCE LT D. 8 BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAS FAIL ED TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM BY FILING ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES OR EVEN BEFORE US. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS ALSO F AILED TO PRODUCE THE DIRECTOR OF M/S SHATTARCHI FIN. & LEASING LTD. AND M/S MIRACULOUS CONSTRUCTION P. LTD. EVEN ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED A NY CONFIRMATION OR BANK ACCOUNT OR BALANCE SHEET OF M/S MIRACULOUS CON ST. P. LTD. FOR SUBSTANTIATING ITS CLAIM BEFORE THE REVENUE AUTHORI TY. 13. KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT LD. FIRST APPELLATE A UTHORITY HAS PASSED A WELL REASONED ORDER BY CITING VARIOUS DECISIONS REN DERED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA AND THE HONBLE HIGH COURTS WHICH ARE FULLY SUPPORTED THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THEREFORE, NO INTERF ERENCE IS CALLED FOR IN THE WELL REASONED IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE PRESENT CAS E IS NOT FIT FOR SETTING ASIDE THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE TO THE AO FOR FRESH DEC ISION BECAUSE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FOR SUBSTANT IATING ITS CLAIM BEFORE THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AS WELL AS BEFORE US. THER EFORE, WE UPHOLD THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 15/11/2012 PASSED BY THE CIT(A ) BY DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 14. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DI SMISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20/10/2014 SD/- SD/- (J.S. REDDY) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 20/10/2014 *KAVITA, P.S. ITA NO. 235/D/2013 RAGHUPATI LEASING & FINANCE LT D. 9 COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR