ACIT, New Delhi V. M/s Super Speed Roadways, Delhi

ITA 2753/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3910 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 26-05-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 05-06-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KISHORE B
• Assessee Lawyers: K P GANGULI
• Keywords: Gift
• Section: 68; 69; 6

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH G NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.2753/DEL/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 ASSTT. CIT, VS. M/S SUPER SPEED ROADWAYS, CIRCLE 20(1), G-35, BHAIRON MANDIR ESTATE, NEW DELHI BOULWARD ROAD, DELHI. PAN NO.ATFS 7308 G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI KISHORE B., SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.P. GANGULI, ADVOCATE ORDER PER K.G. BANSAL, AM: THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A PAR TNERSHIP FIRM CONSISTING OF THREE PARTNERSHIP, SHRI VIJENDER KU MAR KAUSHIK, SHRI SANJAY KAUSHIK AND GYANENDRA KAUSHIK. IT IS ENGAGED I N THE BUSINESS OF TRANSPORTATION OF GOODS. THE RETURN WAS FILED ON 3 1.10.2006 DISCLOSING LOSS OF `23,68,994/-. THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) ON 23.03.2007. THEREAFTER, ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED BY ISSUING NOTICE U/S 143(2). THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED ON 31.12.2008 AT LOSS OF `2,45,528/-. IN THIS ASSESSMENT, TW O AMOUNTS WERE DEDUCTED FROM THE DECLARED LOSS, I.E., - (I) ON ACCOUNT OF TRADING ADDITION - `6,23,466/-, AND (II) UNEXPLAINED CASH CR EDIT - `15 LACS. 1.1 THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED FOLLOWING DISCREPANCIES I N THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ON ACCOUNT OF WHICH FREIGHT RECEIPTS WERE ENHANCED BY 10% TO `2,13,91,938/-, AND GROSS PROFIT RATIO WAS ESTIMATED AT 26% AGAINST THE DECLARED RATIO OF 25.34%: 2 I) THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED TRUCK-WISE EXPENSES FOR ALL THE 25 TRUCKS SEPARATELY IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT BUT NO TRUCK- WISE RECEIPTS ARE RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. I T IS NOT POSSIBLE TO FIND OUT MONTHLY OR ANNUAL RECEIPTS FROM P ARTICULAR TRUCKS EVEN THOUGH THE EXPENSES HAVE BEEN ENTERED TRUC K- WISE. II) IN SPITE OF PURCHASE OF 7 NEW TRUCKS AT ALMOST THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR THE FREIGHT RECEIPTS HAVE GONE DOWN BY ABOU T 10% DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AS COMPARED WITH THOSE OF LAST YEAR. III) FOR A PART OF FREIGHT RECEIPTS ENTERED IN THE B OOKS OF ACCOUNTS THERE IS NO MENTION OF TRUCK NUMBERS FROM WHICH FREIG HT HAS BEEN EARNED. AGAINST SOME RECEIPTS THERE IS NO MENTION OF PLACE/TRIP OF TRUCK. IV) THE MONTHLY FREIGHT RECEIPTS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IN DICATE HEAVY VARIATION. V) A PART OF THE EXPENSES CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT SUPPORTED BY BILLS AND VOUCHERS, ONLY SELF-MADE PLAIN P APER VOUCHERS ARE AVAILABLE WHICH DO NOT HAVE COMPLETE DE TAILS OF EXPENSES. EVEN A GOOD PART OF DIESEL EXPENSES IS NOT SUPPORTED BY BILLS. 1.2 IT WAS ALSO FOUND THAT THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF SHR I VIJENDER KUMAR KAUSHIK, PARTNER, WAS CREDITED ON THREE OCCASIONS BY SUM S OF `5 LACS EACH. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT HE RECEIVED THE AFORESAID MONEY IN CASH ON DEATH OF HIS WIFE AS PER HER WILL. THE ASSESSING OFFI CER DID NOT BELIEVE THE WILL TO BE GENUINE AND HELD THAT THE CR EDIT IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE NAME OF THE PARTNER REMAINS UNEXPLA INED AS TO ITS SOURCE AND NATURE. 2. BOTH THESE MATTERS WERE AGITATED IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). IN REGARD TO TRADING ADDITION, IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT TH E ASSESSEE HAS BEEN FOLLOWING SAME METHOD OF ACCOUNTING FROM YEAR TO YEA R. THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT HAVE BEEN AUDITED. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO C OGENT REASON TO REJECT THE BOOK RESULTS. ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITION O F `6,23,466/- HAS BEEN DELETED. 3 2.1 IN REGARD TO ADDITION OF CASH CREDIT OF `15 LACS, IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT SHRI VIJENDER KUMAR KAUSHIK IS A PARTNER OF THE FIRM. THEREFORE, HE IS AN IDENTIFIABLE PERSON AS PARTNER AND NOT A TOTALLY STRANGER TO THE FIRM. HE HAS EXPLAINED THAT HE RECEIVED THE MONEY O N THE DEATH OF HIS WIFE AS PER HER WILL. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IF THERE WAS ANY DOUBT ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE CREDIT, THE MATTER SHOULD HAVE BEEN EXAMINED IN THE CASE OF SHRI VIJENDER KUMAR KAUSHIK. 3. THE REVENUE HAS CHALLENGED THE FINDINGS OF THE LEA RNED CIT(A) BEFORE US IN RESPECT OF BOTH THE MATTERS. THE LEARNED DR REFERRED TO THE FINDINGS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN RESPECT OF TRADI NG ADDITION AND MENTIONED THAT A NUMBER OF VOUCHERS ARE SELF-MADE, WH ICH ARE NOT SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION. THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING F OLLOWED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO SUCH THAT THE RECEIPTS CANNOT BE MATCHED W ITH THE EXPENDITURE. THEREFORE, IT IS ARGUED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER RIGHTLY REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. HOWEVER, HE WAS NOT A BLE TO SUBSTANTIATE THE ESTIMATION OF TURN OVER AND GROSS PROFI T RATIO, WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN FIXED EITHER WITH REFERENCE TO PAST RE CORD OR COMPARABLE CASES. WHEN QUESTIONED ON THIS MATTER, IT IS SUBMITTED T HAT EVEN IF THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW, PART OF THE EXPENSES ARE REQUIRED TO BE DISALLOWED FOR LACK OF VERIFICATION. 3.1 IN REGARD TO THE CREDIT OF `15 LACS, THE LEARNED DR REFERRED TO THE COPY OF WILL DATED 16.02.2004 PLACED ON RECORD. IT IS WRITTEN ON A PLAIN PAPER AND HAS BEEN NOTARIZED. THE ESSENTIAL CONTENTS O F THE WILL ARE THAT SHE IS IN POSSESSION OF CASH AMOUNTING TO `16,37,725/ - ON ACCOUNT OF GIFTS RECEIVED IN PAST ON VARIOUS CEREMONIAL OCCASIO NS AND THE MONEY ACCUMULATED. SINCE SHE IS NOT KEEPING GOOD HEA LTH, THEREFORE, THE WILL IS WRITTEN THAT AFTER THE DEATH, THE HUSBAND AND AFTER HIS DEATH, THE GRAND SON WILL BE ENTITLED TO THIS MONEY. A DIRE CTION IS ALSO GIVEN TO SPEND SOME MONEY ON THE OCCASION OF THE MARRIAGE OF THE NEPHEW 4 AND THE NIECE. THE BALANCE CAN BE KEPT BY THE HUSBA ND. THE CASE OF THE LEARNED DR IS THAT IT IS QUITE IMPROBABLE THAT A PERSON RESIDING IN CIVIL LINES, A POSH AREA OF DELHI, WILL KEEP SUCH A HU GE AMOUNT IN CASH, FOR WHICH THERE IS NO PLAUSIBLE EXPLANATION. THEREFO RE, IT IS A SELF- SERVING DOCUMENT WRITTEN ON A PLAIN PAPER, CREATED W ITH A VIEW TO INTRODUCE UNACCOUNTED MONEY IN THE BOOKS OF THE FIRM . ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ARGUED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER RIGHTLY MADE THE AD DITION IN THE HANDS OF THE FIRM. 4. IN REPLY, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RELIED HEAVILY ON THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN RESPECT OF BOTH T HE GROUNDS. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN FOLLOWING THE SAME ME THOD OF ACCOUNTING FROM YEAR TO YEAR. THE RECEIPTS AND THE GROSS PROFIT RATIOS CANNOT STAY CONSTANT FROM YEAR TO YEAR. THEREFORE, T HE LEARNED CIT(A) RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFI CER TO THE BOOK RESULTS. 4.1 IN SO FAR AS THE ADDITION TO THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT IS CONCERNED, THE PARTNER IS IDENTIFIABLE AND THE MONEY HAS BEEN CREDIT ED IN HIS CAPITAL ACCOUNT. HE HAD A SUM OF `16,37,725/- IN HIS POSSESSION, WHICH WAS RECEIVED AS PER WILL ON THE DEATH OF HIS WIFE. THERE FORE, NO ADDITION COULD BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE FIRM. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND SUBMISSIO NS MADE BEFORE US. WE FIND THAT ALTHOUGH THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE OUT SOME CASE ABOUT NON-VERIFIABILITY OF THE EXPENSES ON AC COUNT OF SELF- MADE VOUCHERS, THERE IS NO OTHER FIRM GROUND, WHICH C OULD BE TERMED AS A DEFECT IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THE RECEIPTS WIL L DEPEND UPON THE BUSINESS CONDUCTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN A PARTICULAR YEAR DE PENDING UPON MARKET CONDITIONS. THE GROSS PROFIT RATIO ALSO CA NNOT STAY CONSISTENT. FURTHER, EVEN IF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ARE REJ ECTED, THE PROFIT 5 HAS TO BE ESTIMATED ON A REASONABLE BASIS AND NOT IN AN ARBITRARY MANNER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT SHOWN ANY EVIDENCE IN QUANTIFYING THE RECEIPTS AND FIXATION OF GROSS PROFIT RATIO. ACCORDINGLY, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS RIGHT IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE BOOK RESUL TS. THUS, GROUND NO.1 IS DISMISSED. 5.1 THE FACTS IN REGARD TO THE CASH CREDIT ARE THAT T HE ACCOUNT OF SHRI VIJENDER KUMAR KAUSHIK, PARTNER, WAS FOUND TO BE CRED ITED BY A TOTAL SUM OF `15 LACS IN THIS YEAR. HE IS ASSESSED TO TAX AND HA S BEEN FILING HIS RETURN OF INCOME REGULARLY. AS MENTIONED EARLIER , HE IS ALSO A PARTNER OF THE FIRM. THEREFORE, HE IS AN IDENTIFIAB LE PERSON. ON PERUSAL OF THE WILL, WE FIND THAT IT IS NOT A RELIABLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE AS THERE ARE A NUMBER OF CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH LEAD TO THE INFER ENCE THAT IT IS A DOCUMENT WHICH HAS BEEN MANUFACTURED BY SHRI VIJENDE R KUMAR KAUSHIK IN ORDER TO SHOW THE POSSESSION OF A SUM OF `16,37 ,725/- AS RECEIVED FROM THE DECEASED WIFE. NONE OF THE WITNESSE S HAVE MENTIONED THAT THEY HAVE SEEN THE MONEY IN POSSESSION OF THE DECEASED. THE BACKGROUND STATED ABOUT THE ACCUMULATI ON OF THE MONEY IS NOT BELIEVABLE. THE DECEASED LIVED IN CIVIL LINES AREA, WHICH IS A POSH AREA AND IS ADEQUATELY SERVICED BY BANKING FA CILITIES. THEREFORE, POSSESSION OF SUCH A LARGE AMOUNT OF MONEY IN CASH CANNOT BE BELIEVED. THE WILL ALSO DOES NOT SPEAK OF ANY BANK ACCOUNT OR ANY OTHER MOVABLE PROPERTY OF THE DECEASED. THEREFORE, WE TEND TO AGREE WITH THE LEARNED DR THAT THIS DOCUMENT CANNOT BE REL IED UPON. HE RELIED ON A NUMBER OF CASES TO SUPPORT THE CONTENTION THAT THE ADDITION CAN BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE FIRM, WHICH ARE AS UN DER:- I) IN THE CASE OF ANAND RAM RAITANI VS. CIT (1997) 22 3 ITR 544 (GAUHATI), IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT WHERE A CREDIT IS FO UND IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF A FIRM, THE ADDITION CANNOT BE M ADE IN THE HANDS OF THE PARTNER BY INVOKING THE PROVISION CONTAI NED IN 6 SECTION 68 BECAUSE THE PRE CONDITION IS THAT THE CREDI T IS FOUND IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE; II) IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SHIV SHAKTI TIMBERS (1998) 229 ITR 505 (MP), IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT WHERE SEVERAL CREDITS ARE FOUND IN THE BOOKS OF THE FIRM IN THE NAMES OF THE PARTNERS, FO R WHICH THERE IS NO SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 68 ARE APPLICABLE AND THE AMOUNT CAN BE TAXED IN TH E HANDS OF THE FIRM. HOWEVER, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 69 AR E NOT APPLICABLE; AND III) IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS. DHAN LAKSHMI STEEL RE-ROL LING MILL (1996) 57 ITR 361, IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT WHERE THE EXPLANATION IN REGARD TO CASH CREDIT IN THE NAMES OF FRIENDS AND RELATIVES, FOR WHICH NO DOCUMENTARY PROOF IS FIL ED, IS THAT THEY LENT MONEYS FROM THEIR UNACCOUNTED MONEYS, THE ADDITION CAN BE MADE U/S 68 BY DRAWING ADVERSE INFERE NCE. 5.2 AS AGAINST THE AFORESAID, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR T HE ASSESSEE FIRST RELIED ON THE CASES U/S 68 TO CANVAS THAT ON THE F ACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, NO ADDITION WHATSOEVER COULD BE MADE AS THE INITIAL ONUS STANDS DISCHARGED. THEREAFTER, HE REL IED ON CASES DEALING WITH CREDITS IN THE CASE OF PARTNERS. THESE CA SES ARE AS UNDER:- I) IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. S.P. JAIN (1973) 87 ITR 370 (SUPREME COURT), IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS TO BASE ITS JUDGMENT ON THE EVIDENCE ON RECORD AND THE STATUTORY LANGUAGE, AND WHERE IT IS BASED PARTLY ON MATERIAL ON RECORD AND PARTLY ON IRRELEVANT CONSIDERATIONS OR ON ITS OWN IMAGINATION, THE COURTS CAN HOLD THAT THE FINDINGS AR E VITIATED; II) IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. BIJU PATNAIK (1986) 160 IT R 674 (SUPREME COURT), IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT NON CONSIDERAT ION OF VITAL FACTS ABOUT GENUINENESS OF THE TRUST, AND IDENTIT Y AND 7 CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE DONORS TO MAKE DONATIONS OF LAR GE SUMS WHICH REMAINED LYING WITH THE TRUST FOR OVER A DE CADE IN CASH MAKES THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL PERVERSE IN THE SE NSE THAT NO MAN INSTRUCTED PROPERLY IN LAW COULD HAVE AC TED AS THE TRIBUNAL DID; III) IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. BAISHNAB CHARAN MOHANTY, ( 1995) 215 ITR 827 (ORISSA), THE TRIBUNAL HAD RECORDED THE FINDI NG THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DISCHARGED THE ONUS OF PROVING GENUINENE SS OF THE CREDITS IN THE NAMES OF MINOR SONS AND WIFE AFTE R CONSIDERING ALL RELEVANT FACTS. THE HONBLE COURT M ENTIONED THAT THIS IS A FINDING OF FACT ARRIVED AT ON THE BASIS OF RELEVANT FACTS ON RECORD AND, THEREFORE, IT WILL NOT INTERFER E WITH THE FINDING; IV) IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. METACHEM INDUSTRIES, (2000) 245 ITR 160 (MP), IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT IT IS FOR THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THAT INVESTMENT HAS BEEN MADE BY A PARTICULAR INDIVID UAL AND IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THAT INDIVIDUAL TO ACCOUNT FOR THE INVESTMENT, THEREFORE, IF THAT PERSON OWNS THE ENTRY, THEN THE BURDEN OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM IN RESPECT OF CREDITS IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT STANDS DISCHARGED; AND V) IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. BURMA ELECTRIC CORPORATION, (2001) 252 ITR 344 (P&H), IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT SINCE THE PARTNE RS ARE IDENTIFIABLE PERSONS AND THEY ARE ASSESSED TO TAX, THE CR EDITS IN THEIR NAMES CANNOT BE ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE-FIRM NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO EXPLAIN SUFFICIENCY OF FUNDS IN THEI R HANDS. 6. WE HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED THE FACTS AND COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT LATE SMT. RAJKUMARI KAUSHIK, WIFE OF SHRI VIJEN DER KUMAR KAUSHIK, DID NOT REALLY POSSESS CASH AMOUNT OF `16,37,725/-. THE REFORE, THE AVAILABILITY OF CASH OF `15 LACS IN THE HANDS OF SHRI VIJENDER KUMAR 8 KAUSHIK REMAINS UNEXPLAINED. THE ASSESSEE-FIRM IS CONSTIT UTED OF THREE PARTNERS, SHRI VIJENDER KUMAR KAUSHIK AND TWO T WO SONS SHRI SANJAY KAUSHIK AND GYNENDRA KAUSHIK. IN THE AFORESAID WILL, REFERENCES HAVE BEEN MADE TO THESE TWO SONS, THEIR WIVES AND THREE GRAND CHILDREN. HOWEVER, THE WHOLE OF THE AMOUNT IS STATED TO BE LEFT WITH THE HUSBAND. THERE IS DIVERGENCE OF OPINION IN THE D ECISION OF HIGH COURTS IN THE MATTER AS TO WHETHER A CREDIT IN THE NA ME OF THE PARTNER CAN BE TAXED IN THE HANDS OF THE FIRM. THE DECISION OF HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SHIV SHAKTI TIMBERS SUPPORTS THE CASE OF REVENUE WHEN IT IS HELD THAT FOR INVOKING SECT ION 68, THERE SHOULD BE A SUM FOUND CREDITED IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSE E. IN THIS CASE, THE CREDIT STANDS IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE AND PR IOR TO SUCH CREDIT, IT HAS NOT BEEN CREDITED IN ANY OTHER BOOKS O F ACCOUNT. HOWEVER, IN THE DECISION OF THE SAME COURT IN THE CASE OF METACHEM INDUSTRIES (SUPRA), IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT THE MOMENT TH E FIRM GIVES A SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION AND PRODUCES THE PERSON WHO HA S DEPOSITED THE AMOUNT, THEN THE BURDEN CAST ON THE FIRM IS DISCHA RGED. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION LEFT BEFORE US AFTER READING BOTH THE CA SES TOGETHER IS WHETHER THE FIRM HAS GIVEN A SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION. THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF BURMA ELECTRIC CORPORATION RENDERED BY H ONBLE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT, IS MORE PRONOUNCED WHEN IT HAS BE EN MENTIONED THAT THE CREDITS IN THE BOOKS OF THE FIRM IN THE NAME S OF THE PARTNERS CANNOT BE ASSESSED AS ITS INCOME U/S 68 EVEN AFTER MENTION ING THAT SOME PARTNERS COULD NOT EXPLAIN SUFFICIENCY OF FUNDS AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT. IN VIEW OF THIS DECISION, IT WILL BE APPROPR IATE TO HOLD THAT SINCE THE PARTNER IS IDENTIFIABLE PERSON AND HE HAS ADM ITTED TO THE AMOUNT INVESTED IN THE FIRM, THE CREDIT CANNOT BE ASSE SSED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE-FIRM, NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT THAT THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF MONEY IN HIS HANDS HAS NOT BEEN SATISFACTOR ILY EXPLAINED. THE RIGHT COURSE OF ACTION WOULD BE TO T AKE STEPS AS WARRANTED BY LAW IN THE CASE OF VIJENDER KUMAR KAUSHI K, THE PARTNER. 9 6.1 IN RESULT, THIS GROUND IS ALSO DISMISSED. 7. IN RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03.06. 2011. SD/- SD/- ( RAJPAL YADAV ) ( K.G. BANSAL ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DT. 03.06.2011. NS COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. ASST. CIT, CIRCLE 20(1), NEW DELHI. 2. M/S SUPER SPEED ROADWAYS, G-35, BHAIRON MANDIR ESTA TE, BOULWARD ROAD, DELHI. 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT (A)-, NEW DELHI. 5. THE DR, ITAT, LOKNAYAK BHAWAN, KHAN MARKET, NEW DELHI. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER (ITAT, NEW DELHI).