ITO, New Delhi V. M/s. Bajaj & Company Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 2989/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6854 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 7 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 28-01-2016
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 26-06-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K K JAISWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ABHIS
• Keywords: Reopening of assessment; Gift; Question of law; Tangible material; Accommodation entries; Reason to believe; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 143(3); 68; 148

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 2989/DEL/2009 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH A, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI J.S. REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 2989 /DEL/20 09 A.Y. : 200 1 - 0 2 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3), ROOM NO. 389-A, C.R.BUILDING, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI VS. M/S BAJAJ & COMPANY PVT. LTD., 104-B, MAHARANI BAGH, NEW DELHI (PAN: AACCB0159N) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY : S H. K.K. JAISWAL, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : DR. RAKESH GUPTA, ADV., SH. SOMIL AGARWAL, ADV. & SH. ABHISHEK ANAND, ADV. DATE OF HEARING : 28-01-2016 DATE OF ORDER : 10-02-2016 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM REVENUE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPUGNE D ORDER DATED 31.3.2009 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-V, NEW DELHI REL EVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING ADDITION. ITA NO. 2989/DEL/2009 2 A) OF RS. 5,00,000/- MADE BY THE AO U/S. 68 OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF ADDITION TO SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AS U NEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS AND RS. 5000/- ON ACCOUNT OF COMMISSIO N PAID FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. B) RS. 27,00,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED SHARE PRE MIUM. IGNORING THE FACT THAT I) THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE AO IS BASED ON INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE INVESTIGATION WING OF THE DEPARTMENT THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS RECEIVED B OGUS ENTRY OF RS. 5 LACS FROM M/S IG PROPERTIES (P) LTD . A COMPANY ENGAGED IN PROVIDING BOGUS ENTRIES. II) THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO EXPLAIN AS TO HOW THE VALUE OF THE SHARE PREMIUM OF RS. 27 LACS WAS ARRIVED AT III) THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE THE DIRECTOR OF M/S IG PROPERTIES (P) LTD. SO AS TO VERIFY THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION AND TO ESTABLISH THE IDENTITY OF THE PA RTY. THE PHYSICAL APPERANCE OF DOUBTED PARTIES IS A MUST AS A PARAMETER OF IDENTITY. 2) THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE ARE DISTINGUISHA BLE TO THAT OF M/S LOVELY EXPORTS (P) LTD. RELIED UPON BY THE LD. CIT(A). 3) THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE FOR RESERVING THE RIG HT TO AMEND, MODIFY, ALTER, ADD OR FOREGO ANY GROUND(S) OF APPEA L AT ANY TIME BEFORE OR DURING THE HEARING OF THIS APPEAL. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E HAS FILED ITS RETURN, DECLARING LOSS OF RS. 97,298/-ON 19.10.2001 . THEREAFTER, A REPORT FROM THE DIT (INV.) WAS RECEIVED IN RESPECT OF BOGUS ENTRY RACKET WHEREIN IT WAS SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD RECEIVED AN AMOUNT OF RS. 5 LACS ON 27. 4.2000 THROUGH ITA NO. 2989/DEL/2009 3 CHEQUE FROM ONE OF THE COMPANIES USED BY THE ENTRY PROVIDERS TO PROVIDE BOGUS ENTRIES NAMELY, M/S IG PROPERTIES (P) LTD., THE AO HAD ISSUED A NOTICE U/S. 148 AFTER RECORDING THE REASON S IN WRITING THAT INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAID NOTICE DATED 3.11.2006, ASSESSEES AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FILED THE DETAILS CALLED FOR. THEREAFTER, THE AO VIDE OR DER DATED 28.12.207 PASSED U/S. 143(3)(II) AND ASSESSED THE INCOME AT RS. 31,27,380/- AFTER MAKING VARIOUS ADDITIONS. 3. AGAINST THE SAID ORDER OF THE LD. AO, ASSESSEE APPEALED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), WHO VIDE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 31.3. 2009 HAS PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE THEREBY DELETING THE ADDITION IN DISPUTE AND UPHOLDING THE REOPENING IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE. 4. AGGRIEVED WITH THE AFORESAID ORDER OF THE LD . CIT(A), REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US THE TRIBUNAL. 5. LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE AO AND REITE RATED THE CONTENTIONS RAISED IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON THE LEGAL ISSUE AND STA TED THAT AO HAS RIGHTLY REOPENED THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL WHICH AO HAS MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY UPHELD THE SAME. HE REQUESTED THAT ON LEG AL ISSUE, THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) MAY BE UPHELD. 6. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE STA TED THAT THE REOPENING IN THE PRESENT CASE IS ILLEGAL AND THE SA ME MAY BE QUASHED. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE PRESENT CASE IS SQUA RELY COVERED BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT DECISION DATED 8.10.2015 PASSED IN ITA NO. 545/2015 IN THE CASE OF PR. CIT-4 VS. G&G PHARMA IN DIA LTD., WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL DECISION DATED 9.1.2015 HAS BEEN FOLLO WED. IN THIS BEHALF, HE FILED THE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 8.10. 2015 OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI IN PR. CIT VS. G&G PHARMA INDIA LTD. THEREFORE, ITA NO. 2989/DEL/2009 4 HE REQUESTED THAT BY FOLLOWING THE DECISION IN TH E CASE OF PR. CIT VS. G&G PHARMA INDIA LTD., THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVE NUE MAY BE DISMISSED. 7. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT RECORDS AVAILABLE WITH US, ESPECIALLY THE ORDERS OF THE REV ENUE AUTHORITIES AND THE CASE LAWS CITED BY THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL. FOR THE SAKE OF CLARITY, WE WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THE RELEVANT REASONS FOR REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNDER:- OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD 2(3) ROOM NO: 389A,C.R.BUILDING,NEW DELHI .. REASONS AN ENQUIRY WAS INITIATED IN AUGUST 2003, TO PROBE I NTO EIGHT ACCOUNTS FROM WHICH CHEQUES IN FORM OR GIFTS AMOUN TING TO R~, ,15 LAKHXHAD BEEN ISSUED TO SH, ASHOK KUMAR CHAUHAN, PROPRIETOR M/S GURCHARAN JEWELLERS. HIS WI FE AND SON, DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY CONDUCTED BY THE F IELD OFFICERS THE JEWELLER HAD ADMITTED THAT THESE GIFTS HAD BEEN 'ARRANGED' BY PAYING CASH TO THE DONORS, THE ASSESS EE SH, ASHOK KUMAR CHAUHAN AGREED TO PAY TAXES ON SUCH GIF TS, THE ACCOUNTS FROM WHICH SUCH GIFTS WERE RECEIVED WE RE IN THE ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE, MINTO ROAD, AND THE STATE BANK OF PATIALA, DARYA GANJ. ITA NO. 2989/DEL/2009 5 SINCE THE AO WAS NOT HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THE DONORS CASES, THE CASE WAS, THE CASE WAS HANDED O VER TO THIS DIRECTORATE TO INVESTIGATE AND FIND OUT THE OTHER DONORS FROM THOSE ACCOUNTS. IN TWO YEARS TIME THE NUMBER OF ACCOUNTS WHICH WERE ONLY EIGHT IN NUMBER HAVE S WOLLEN IN HUNDREDS. IT IS HOWEVER FELT THAT THE ACCOUNTS I DENTIFIED BY THE DIRECTORATE ACE NOT COMPLETE AND THE AMOUNT AS WELL AS THE NUMBER OF ACCOUNTS INVOLVED WILL BE MUCH MO RE, FURTHER IT MAY BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT SUCH ENTRY O PERATORS ARE OPERATING IN OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTRY AS WELL , CAUSING REVENUE LOSSES TO THE GOVERNMENT. THE MANPOWER AND RESOURCES AVAILABLE WITH THE DIRECTORATE ARE LIMITE D AND THE HANKS ARE GENERALLY SLOW IN PROVIDING DETAILS DUE T O SEVERAL CONSTRAINTS FACED BY THEM. ENTRIES ARE BROADLY TAKEN FOR TWO PURPOSES 7. TO PLOUGH BACK UNACCOUNTED BLACK MONEY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS OR FOR PERSONAL NEEDS SUCH AS P URCHASE OF ASSETS ETC. IN THE FORM OF GIFTS, SHARE APPLICAT ION MONEY, LOANS ETC. ITA NO. 2989/DEL/2009 6 8. TO INFLATE EXPENSES IN THE TRADING AND PROFIT A ND LOSS ACCOUNT SO AS TO REDUCE THE REAL PROFITS AND THEREB Y PAY LESS TAXES. MODUS OPERANDI THE ASSESSES WHO HAVE UNACCOUNTED MONEY (HEREINAFTE R CALLED AS ENTRY TAKERS OR BENEFICIARIES) AND WANT T O INTRODUCE THE SAME IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WITHOUT PAYING TAX, APPROACH ANOTHER PERSON (HEREINAFTER CALLED AS ENTRY OPERATOR) AND HAND OVER THE CASH (PLUS COMMISSION) AND TAKE CHEQUES/DDS/POS. THE CASH IS DEPOSITED BY THE ENTRY OPERATOR IN A BANK ACCOUNT EITHER IN HIS OWN NAME O R IN THE NAME OF RELATIVE/FRIENDS OR OTHER PERSON HIRED BY.H IM, FOR THE PU:POSE OF OPENING BANK ACCOUNT IN MOST OF THES E BANK ACCOUNTS THE INTRODUCER IS THE MAIN ENTRY OPERATOR AND THE CASH DEPOSIT SLIPS AND OTHER INSTRUMENTS ARE TILLED BY HIM. THE OTHER PERSONS (IN WHOSE NAME THE A/C IS OPENED) ONLY SIGNS THE BLANK CHEQUE BOOK AND HANDS. OVER THE SAM E TO THE MAIN ENTRY OPERATOR. THE ENTRY OPERATOR THEN IS SUES CHEQUES/DDS/POS IN THE NAME OF THE BENEFICIARY FROM THE SAME ACCOUNT (IN WHICH THE CASH IS DEPOSITED) OR AN OTHER ACCOUNT IN WHICH FUNDS ARE TRANSFERRED THROUGH CLEA RING IN TWO OR MORE STAGES, THE BENEFICIARY IN TURN DEPOSIT S THESE ITA NO. 2989/DEL/2009 7 INSTRUMENTS IN HIS BANK ACCOUNTS AND THE MONEY COME S TO HIS REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IN THE FORM OF GIFT, S HARE APPLICATION MONEY, LOAN ETC THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL S. SINCE THE FUNDS HAVE COME THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL IN THE BOOKS OF BENEFICIARY THESE APPARENTLY LOOK GENUINE. AT TH E TIME OF ASSESSMENT THE BENEFICIARY PROVIDES THE PAN, ASSESS MENT PARTICULARS AND CONFIRMATION FROM THE ENTRY OPERATO RS TO SHOW THE GENUINENESS OF THESE RECEIPTS AND THE ASSE SSING OFFICER DOES NOT INVESTIGATE ANY FURTHER. .. ENQUIRIES BY THE INVESTIGATION WING, HAS REVEALED THAT M/S IG PROPERTIES P LTD HAS GIVEN THE ENTRY TO MY ASSESSEE M/S BAJAJ & COMPANY PVT. LTD., B-104, MAHA RANI BAGH, DELHI 110 065. IN THE AY 2001-02 THE ASSES SEE HAS SHOWN THESE RECEIPTS IN ITS BANK ACCOUNT AS PER THE DIT(INV.). IN THE INSTANT CASE OF THE ASSESSEE, THE FOLLOWING CREDITS HAVE BEEN SHOWN IN THE BANK ACCOUNT: BANK OF THE ASSES SEE BRANCH OF THE BANK INSTRUME NT NO. AMOUNT DATE CREDIT ENTRY COMING FROM THE ACCOUNT ITA NO. 2989/DEL/2009 8 OF SBI FRIENDS COLONY 493629 500000 27.4.2000 IG PROPERTI ES P LTD. IT IS ALSO SEEN FROM THE IT RETURN FOR THE AY 200 1-02, THAT THE PAID UP SHARE CAPITAL HAS INCREASED FROM 25 LAKHS TO RS. 43 LAKHS AND THE SHARE PREMIUM FOR 18000 SHA RES HAS INCREASED FROM RS. 0 TO RS. 27 LAKHS. IN VIEW OF THE FINDINGS OF THE INVESTIGATION REPOR T, THE CASE OF THE ABOVE ASSESSEE NEEDS SCRUTINY, IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE ABOVE ENTRY HAVE BEEN OBTAINED THRO UGH THE ENTRY OPERATOR, INVESTIGATED AND REPORTED BY THE INVESTIGATION WING. I THEREFORE HAVE REASONS TO BEL IEVE THAT THIS AMOUNT OF RS. 5 LAKHS REPRESENTS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE CHARGEABLE TO TAX AND WHICH HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT FOR AY 2001-02. IN ORDER TO VERIFY THE GEUNINENESS OF THIS TRANSACTION, IT IS PROPOSED THA T NECESSARY PERMISSION FOR ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S. 148 F OR THE AY 2001-02 IS REQUESTED, SINCE 4 YEARS HAVE ELAPSED, B UT NOT MORE THAN 6 YEARS, THE PROPOSAL IS FORWARDED AS LAI D DOWN UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 149(1)(B) OF THE I. T. ACT, 1961. KIND APPROVAL FOR ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S. 148(I) IS SO UGHT AS ITA NO. 2989/DEL/2009 9 PER THE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 151, READ WITH SUBSECTION (2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT , 1961. SD/- 2/11/06 (VINOTHAN SUBRAMANIAM) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3), NEW DELHI 7.1 ON GOING THROUGH THE ABOVE REASONS RECORDED BY THE AO, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT AO HAS NOT APPLIED HIS MIND SO AS TO COME TO AN INDEPENDENT CONCLUSION THAT HE HAS REASON TO BELIEV E THAT INCOME HAS ESCAPED DURING THE YEAR. IN OUR VIEW THE REASONS AR E VAGUE AND ARE NOT BASED ON ANY TANGIBLE MATERIAL AS WELL AS ARE N OT ACCEPTABLE IN THE EYES OF LAW. THE AO HAS MECHANICALLY ISSUED NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE ACT, ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION ALLEGEDLY RECEIVED BY HIM FROM THE DIRECTORATE OF INCOME TAX (INVESTIGATION), NEW DELH I. KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE AND THE CASE LAW APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE OF T HE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE REOPENING IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSTT. YEAR IN DISPUTE IS BAD IN LAW AND DESERVES TO BE QUASHED. OUR VIEW IS SUPPORTED BY THE FOLLOWING JUDGMENT/DECISION:- (A) PR. CIT VS. G&G PHARMA INDIA LTD. IN ITA NO. 545/2015 DATED 8.10.2015 OF THE DELHI HIGH COURT ITA NO. 2989/DEL/2009 10 WHEREIN THE HONBLE COURT HAS ADJUDICATED THE ISSUE AS UNDER:- 12. IN THE PRESENT CASE, AFTER SETTING OUT FOUR EN TRIES, STATED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON A S INGLE DATE I.E. 10TH FEBRUARY 2003, FROM FOUR ENTITIES WH ICH WERE TERMED AS ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES, WHICH INFORMATION WAS GIVEN TO HIM BY THE DIRECTORATE OF INVESTIGATION, THE AO STATED: 'I HAVE ALSO PERUSED VARIOUS MATERIALS AND REPORT FROM INVESTIGATION WING AND ON THAT BASIS IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS INTRODUCED ITS OWN UNACCOUNTED MONEY IN ITS BANK AC COUNT BY WAY OF ABOVE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES.' THE ABOVE CONCLUSION IS UNHELPFUL IN UNDERSTANDING WHETHER TH E AO APPLIED HIS MIND TO THE MATERIALS THAT HE TALKS ABO UT PARTICULARLY SINCE HE DID NOT DESCRIBE WHAT THOSE M ATERIALS WERE. ONCE THE DATE ON WHICH THE SO CALLED ACCOMMOD ATION ENTRIES WERE PROVIDED IS KNOWN, IT WOULD NOT HAVE B EEN DIFFICULT FOR THE AO, IF HE HAD IN FACT UNDERTAKEN THE EXERCISE, TO MAKE A REFERENCE TO THE MANNER IN WHIC H THOSE VERY ENTRIES WERE PROVIDED IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE A SSESSEE, WHICH MUST HAVE BEEN TENDERED ALONG WITH THE RETURN , WHICH WAS FILED ON 14TH NOVEMBER 2004 AND WAS PROCESSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT. WITHOUT F ORMING A PRIMA FACIE OPINION, ON THE BASIS OF SUCH MATERIA L, IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE FOR THE AO TO HAVE SIMPLY CONCLUDED: ' IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS INTRODUCED IT S OWN UNACCOUNTED MONEY IN ITS BANK BY WAY OF ACCOMMODATI ON ENTRIES'. IN THE CONSIDERED VIEW OF THE COURT, IN L IGHT OF THE LAW EXPLAINED WITH SUFFICIENT CLARITY BY THE SUPREM E COURT IN THE DECISIONS DISCUSSED HEREINBEFORE, THE BASIC ITA NO. 2989/DEL/2009 11 REQUIREMENT THAT THE AO MUST APPLY HIS MIND TO THE MATERIALS IN ORDER TO HAVE REASONS TO BELIEVE THAT THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ESCAPED ASSESSMENT IS MISSIN G IN THE PRESENT CASE. 13. MR. SAWHNEY TOOK THE COURT THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) TO SHOW HOW THE CIT (A) DISCUSSED THE MATERI ALS PRODUCED DURING THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL. THE COUR T WOULD LIKE TO OBSERVE THAT THIS IS IN THE NATURE OF A POST MORTEM EXERCISE AFTER THE EVENT OF REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT HAS TAKEN PLACE. WHILE THE CIT MAY HAVE PROCEEDED ON THE BASIS THAT THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT WAS VALID, THIS DOES NOT SATISFY THE REQ UIREMENT OF LAW THAT PRIOR TO THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMEN T, THE AO HAS TO, APPLYING HIS MIND TO THE MATERIALS, CONC LUDE THAT HE HAS REASON TO BELIEVE THAT INCOME OF THE AS SESSEE HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. UNLESS THAT BASIC JURISDICT IONAL REQUIREMENT IS SATISFIED A POST MORTEM EXERCISE OF ANALYSING MATERIALS PRODUCED SUBSEQUENT TO THE REOP ENING WILL NOT RESCUE AN INHERENTLY DEFECTIVE REOPENING O RDER FROM INVALIDITY . 14. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE CONCLUSION REACHED BY THE ITAT CANNOT BE SAID TO BE ERRONEOUS. NO SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW ARISES. 15. THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 8. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE AFORESAID ISSUE IN DISPUTE IS EXACTLY THE SIMILAR AND IDENTIC AL TO THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL AND IS SQUARELY COVE RED BY THE AFORESAID DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI IN THE CASE OF G&G ITA NO. 2989/DEL/2009 12 PHARMA (SUPRA). HENCE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ABOVE PRECEDENTS IN THE CASE OF PR. CIT-4 VS. G&G PHARMA INDIA LTD. (SUPRA), WE DECIDE THE LEGAL ISSUE IN DISPUTE IN FAVOR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE AND ACCORDINGLY QUASH THE REASSESSMENT PROC EEDINGS. SINCE WE HAVE QUASHED THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, AS AF ORESAID, THE OTHER ISSUES ARE NOT BEING DEALT WITH. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE S TAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10/02/2016. SD/- SD/- [J.S. REDDY] [H.S. SIDHU] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE 10/02/2016 SRBHATNAGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT - 2. RESPONDENT - 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES