DCIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Raju Investments (P) Ltd., Delhi

ITA 302/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7597 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 year(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-01-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 16-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUSHMA SINGH
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Additional evidence; Accommodation entries
• Section: 143(3); 143(1); 201; 139(1); 13; 22

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO. 302/DEL/2014 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLAT E TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: F NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDIC IAL MEMBER ITA NO. 302/DEL/2014 ( A .Y 2009-10) (THROUGH VIDEO CONFEREN CING) DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-03 NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) VS RAJU INVESTMENTS (P) LTD. WZ-183, GALI NO. 4 LAJWANTI GARDEN DELHI AAACR7499H (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SMT. SUSHMA SINGH, CIT DR RESPONDENT BY SH. SURESH GUPTA, CA ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORD ER DATED 13/11/2013 PASSED BY CIT(A)-1, NEW DELHI FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 009-10. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE AS UNDER:- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL) ERRED IN L AW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING AN ADDITION OF RS.2,32,00,000/-U/S 68 OF T HE ACT W.R.T. PROCUREMENT OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES THROUGH SHARE APPLICATION MONEY FROM NON-DESCRIPT COMPANIES. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL) ERRED IN L AW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING AN ADDITION OF RS.L,16,000/-MADE BY THE AO W.R.T. COMMISSION PAID @.5% FOR PROCUREMENT OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES THROU GH SHARE APPLICATION DATE OF HEARING 13.01.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 21.01.2021 2 ITA NO. 302/DEL/2014 MONEY FROM NON-DESCRIPT COMPANIES. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN ADMITTING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE UNDER RULE 46 A. 4. (A) THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) IS ERRONEOUS AND NOT TENABLE IN LAW AND ON FACTS. (B) THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER OR AM END ANY/ALL OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR DURING THE COURSE OF TH E HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 3. THE ASSESSEE IS A NON-BANKING FINANCE COMPANY AN D HAD BEEN ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF PROVIDING LOANS AS INVESTMENT IN SHARES AND SECURITIES OF OTHER COMPANIES. THE RETURN OF INCOME U/S 139(1) D ECLARING AN INCOME OF RS.88,919/- WAS FILED ON 31/3/2010. THE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPUTED THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS. 2,34,04,919/- THEREBY MAKING ADDITION RELATED TO UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S 68. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASS ESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE A SSESSEE. 5. THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN DE LETING THE ADDITION U/S 68 OF THE ACT WITH RESPECT TO PROCUREMENT OF ACCOMM ODATION ENTRIES TO SHARE APPLICATION MONEY FROM NON-DESCRIPT COMPANIES. THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) WAS NOT CORRECT IN ADMITTING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE UNDER RULE 46A WITHOUT GIVING PROPER JUSTIFICATION. THE LD. DR SU BMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS NOT GIVEN ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY AND TOTALLY IGNORED THE REMAND REPORT GIVEN AT THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE LD. DR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE INSPECTOR REPORT ABOUT VERIFICAT ION OF THE SHARE APPLICANT PARTIES WAS TOTALLY IGNORED BY THE CIT(A). THE LD. DR POINTED OUT THE INSPECTOR REPORT FROM THE PAPER BOOK AND SUBMITTED THAT THE P ARTIES RELATING TO SHARE ACCOMMODATION ENTRY WERE NOT FOUND AND THE ADDRESS WAS NOT PROPER AND, THEREFORE, GENUINENESS, CREDITWORTHINESS, WAS NOT A T ALL TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WHICH WAS NOT PROVED BY THE ASSESSEE AT THE ASSESSM ENT PROCEEDINGS AS WELL AS 3 ITA NO. 302/DEL/2014 AT THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. THE LD. DR FURTHER S UBMITTED VARIOUS DECISIONS WHICH ARE AS FOLLOWS:- I) SUBHALAKSHMI VANIJYA (P) LTD. VS. CIT (2015) 60 TAXMANN.COM 60 II) BISAKHA SALES (P) LTD. VS. CIT (2014) 52 TAXMAN N.COM 305 III) PR. CIT VS. NRA IRON STEEL PVT. LTD. IN SLP (C IVIL) 29855/2018 ORDER DATED 05.03.2019 IV) THE LD. DR ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,16,000/- WITH RESPECT TO COMMISSION PAID AT 5% F OR PROCUREMENT OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES THROUGH SHARE APPLICATION MON EY FROM NON-DESCRIPT COMPANIES. 6. THE LD. AR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) A ND FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT CONFRONTED THE INSPE CTOR REPORT AS WELL AS THE CONFIRMATION FILED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING S WERE NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT DESPITE ALL THE PARTIES WHICH WERE SUMMONED UNDER 131/133 OF THE ACT HAS RESPONDED. THE LD. AR RELIED UPON THE DEC ISION OF THE SUPERB DEVELOPERS OF THE COORDINATE BENCH WHEREIN SOME OF THESE PARTIES WERE CONCERNED AND THE GROUP IS A SISTER CONCERN OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HEREIN (ITA NO. 54, 55, 56/DEL/2014 AND ITA NO. 403/DEL/20 15 FOR A.Y. 2008-09 TO 2011-12 ORDER DATED 09.07.2018). 7. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT INSPECTOR RE PORT HAS CLEARLY STATED THE WRONG ADDRESS AND THEREFORE, THE SAME WILL NOT PROV E THE CASE OF THE DEPARTMENT THAT THE SHARE APPLICANT PARTIES WERE NO T PROPERLY EXAMINED. THE CIT(A) HAS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT ALL THE EVIDENCES AND HAS CONFRONTED THE SAME TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR WHICH REMAND REPORT WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE CIT(A) HELD AS UNDER: 4 ITA NO. 302/DEL/2014 4.2 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE SU BMISSIONS MADE AND THE DOCUMENTS FILED. I HAVE ALREADY HELD THAT THE A PPELLANT WAS PREVENTED FROM DISCHARGING ITS ONUS ON ACCOUNT OF INSUFFICIEN T OPPORTUNITY AND WAS ALSO PREJUDICED AND, ACCORDINGLY, I HAD ADMITTED THE ADD ITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE APPELLANT. I HAVE EXAMINED THE EVIDENCE FILED B EFORE THE AO AS WELL AS THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED DURING THESE PROCEEDINGS. MY OBSERVATIONS / FINDINGS WITH REGARD TO EACH CASE ARE AS UNDER: SL. NO. NAME OF THE APPLICANTS AMOUNT (RS.) OBSERVATIONS / FINDINGS 1. APT FINCAP (P) LTD. 22,00,000 ITR FOR AY 2009-10 WITH AUDITED BALANCE SHEET, ITR FOR AY 2011-12, SHARE APPLICATION AND BANK STATEMENT ARE FILED. BANK STATEMENT DOES NOT INDICATE ANY CASH DEPOSIT TO ESTABLISH THAT APPELLANT INTRODUCED ITS OWN MONEY. ADVERSE VIEW CANNOT BE TAKEN. 2. AUROCHEM SOFTECH (P) LTD. 30,00,000 THE CASE WAS ASSESSED U/S 143(3) FOR AY 2007-08 ON 29.12.2009 AND U/S 143(1) FOR AY 2009-10 ON 04.09.2010 BY THE DEPARTMENT ITSELF. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NON-EXISTENCE OF THIS CO. DOES NOT ARISE. 3. CHINTAPURNI BUILDERS (P) LTD. 30,00,000 ITR FOR AY 2009-10 WITH AUDITED BALANCE SHEET, ITR FOR AY 2011-12 AND SHARE APPLICATION ARE FILED. BANK STATEMENT FILED SUBSEQUENTLY DOES NOT INDICATE ANY CASH DEPOSIT TO ESTABLISH THAT APPELLANT INTRODUCED ITS OWN MONEY. ADVERSE VIEW CANNOT BE TAKEN. 4. KAY BUILDERS (P) LTD. 50,00,000 ITR, AUDITED BALANCE SHEET, WITH ORDER U/S 143(1) FOR AY 2009-10, ITR FOR AY 5 ITA NO. 302/DEL/2014 2011-12, SHARE APPLICATION AND BANK STATEMENT ARE FILED. BANK STATEMENT DOES NOT INDICATE ANY CASH DEPOSIT TO ESTABLISH T HAT APPELLANT INTRODUCED ITS OWN MONEY. ADVERSE VIEW CANNOT BE TAKEN. 5 MULTITECH SEMICONDUCETORS (P)(LTD) 45,00,000 ITR FOR AY 2008-09 WAS FILED ON 29.03.2009 AND ITR FOR AY 2011-12 WAS FILED ON 29.03.2012. COPIES OF AUDITED BALANCE SHEET AND BANK STATEMENT WERE ALSO FILED CASE WAS ASSESSED U/S 143(3) ON 21.12.2009 FOR AY 2007-08. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NON-EXISTENCE OF THIS CO. DOES NOT ARISE. 6 PASAND MARKETING (P) LTD 15,00,000 CASE WAS ASSESSED FOR AY 2009-10 U/S 143(1) ON 4/09/2010 AND ITR FOR AY 2010-11 WAS FILED ON 5.09.2010. COPIES OF AUDITED BALANCE SHEET AND BANK STATEMENT WERE ALSO FILED. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NON-EXISTENCE OF THIS CO. DOES NOT ARISE. 7. SKYLINK SOFTWARE (P) LTD. 20,00,000 ITR FOR AY 2008-09 WAS FILED ON 2.03.2009 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT NO. 604111502220309 AND ITR FOR AY 2011- 12 WAS FILED ON 31.03.2012 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT NO. 381257601310312. COPIES OF AUDITED BALANCE SHEET, SHARE APPLICATION AND BANK STATEMENT WEE ALSO FILED. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NON-EXISTENCE OF THIS CO. DOES NOT ARISE. 6 ITA NO. 302/DEL/2014 8 WISMAN MARKETING (P) LTD. 20,00,000 COPIES OF AUDITED BALANCE SHEET FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31/03/2006, SHARE APPLICATION AND BANK ACCOUNT HAS BEEN FILED. IT RECORDS COULD NOT BE PR ODUCED. HOWEVER, BANKS STATEMENT DOES NOT INDICATE ANY CASH DEPOSIT TO ESTABLISH THAT APPELLANT INTRODUCED ITS OWN MONEY. ADVERSE VIEW CANNOT BE TAKEN. 4.3. I ALSO FIND THAT THE ALLEGATIONS OF THE REVENU E REGARDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES TAKEN BY THE APPELLANT HAVE N O BASIS IN VIEW OF THE REVENUES OWN ASSESSMENT IN SOME CASES WERE NO SUCH CONCLUSION WAS MADE, LACK OF ANY CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT S OF THE SHARE APPLICANT COMPANIES AND ALSO IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT NO EVID ENCE WAS FOUND DURING THE SEARCH INDICATING SUCH ACTIVITY OR CONFIRMING SUCH ALLEGATIONS. IN THE ABOVE FACT AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ADDITIONS O F SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AS UNEXPLAINED CREDITS U/S 68 CANNOT BE LEGALLY SUS TAINED AND IS DELETED. THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE ALLOWED ACCORDINGLY. 8. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER CHOSE NOT TO CONSIDER THE EVIDENCES ON MERIT AND SIMPLY STATED THAT THESE PARTIES WERE NOT FOUND. THUS, THE ASSESSEE IN OUR OPINION HAS PROVED THE GENUINENESS, IDENTITY AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THESE PARTIES. THE CASE OF THE SISTER CONCERN IN S UPERB DEVELOPERS (SUPRA) HAS ALSO DEALT WITH SOME OF THE PARTIES INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT ASSESSEES CASE. WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL IN SUPERB DEVELOPERS (SUPRA) HELD AS UNDER: 8. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AS REGARDS GROUND NO. 3 OF THE REVENUES A PPEAL, THE CIT(A) RIGHTLY TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATIONS THE EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THERE WAS NO FRESH EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. THIS FACT WAS NOT DENIED BY THE REVENUE. THEREFORE, GROUND NO. 3 7 ITA NO. 302/DEL/2014 OF THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ON MERIT OF T HE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE, IT IS PERTINENT TO TAKE NOTE ABOUT THE ORD ER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 WHICH WAS HANDED OVER BY TH E LD. AR DURING THE HEARING. THE CIT(A) FOR A.Y. 2006-07 HELD AS UNDER: - I HAVE CONSIDERED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE SUBMIS SIONS MADE AND THE DOCUMENTS FILED. I HAVE ALREADY HELD THAT THE APPELLANT WAS PREVENTED FROM DISCHARG ING ITS ONUS ON ACCOUNT OF INSUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY AND WAS ALSO PREJUDICED AND, ACCORDINGLY, I HAVE ADMITT ED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE APPELLANT. AT PRESENT, THE APPEALS INVOLVED IN RESPECT OF THE APP ELLANT ON THE ISSUE OF SHARE APPLICATION / SHARE CA PITAL ARE FOR AY 2006-07 (A.NO.361/13-14), AY 2007-08 (A. NO.360/13-14), AY 2008-09 (A.NO.359/13-14), AY 2009-10 (A.NO.358/13-14) AND AY 2010-11 (A.NO.357/1 3-14). THE SHARE CAPITAL RAISED FROM DIFFERENT COMPANIES IN THESE YEARS IS SUMMARIZED IN THE TABLE GIVEN HEREUNDER: SL NO . APPLICANT COMPANIES ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2006 -07 2007 -08 2008 -09 2009 -10 1010 -11 1 ORACLE CABLES PVT. LTD. 1000000 1500000 2 ARSEY HOSIERY PVT. LTD. 1000000 3 TWICNE TRADERS PVT. LTD. 1000000 4 CHARDHAM IMPEX PVT. LTD. 1500000 5 VIDUR BUILDERS PVT. LTD. 1500000 6 TEJENDER FABRICATION PVT. LTD. 1500000 7 KAISER MARKETING PVT. LTD. 800000 800000 8 INDOLON HOSIERY P LTD. 1200000 425000 1000000 1500000 9 BRAINSOFT INFO CONSULTANNTS PVT. LTD. 45000 500000 10 CHINTAPURNI BUILDERS PVT. LTD. 500000 2000000 1000000 11 MIDAS TOUCH MEDICA PVT. LTD. 1300000 1000000 1000000 8 ITA NO. 302/DEL/2014 12 MULTITECH SEMICONDSUCTOR S PVT. LTD. 1900000 1000000 13 RIBBEL MANUFACTUERRS & EXPOERTERS PVT. LTD. 1000000 2500000 14 SCIENT INFOORMATICS INDIA PVT. LTD. 500000 15 SEVBRO DOMESTIC APPLIANCES PVT. LTD. 500000 16 SKYLINK SOFTWARES PVT. LTD. 1500000 17 APT PROPERTIES PVT. LTD. 2000000 18 DHANVRIDHI FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LD.CIT(A) 1000000 19 INTELIFE MARKETING PVT. LTD. 3500000 20 KAY BUILDWELL PVT. LTD. 1500000 21 KELA DEVI BUILDERS PVT. LTD. 2000000 2000000 22 WISEMAN MARKETING PVT. LTD. 3000000 1500000 23 SHWETA MEHANDI PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. 2000000 24 VAISHNO DEVI LAND & BUILDING DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. 1000000 TOTAL 8300000 1200000 8075000 25800000 7500000 5.3. I HAVE EXAMINED THE EVIDENCES FILED AND MY OBS ERVATIONS / FINDINGS WITH REGARD TO EACH CASE ARE A S UNDER: SL NO. APPLICANT COMPANIES OBSERVATIONS/FINDIGNS 9 ITA NO. 302/DEL/2014 1 ORACLE CABLES PVT. LTD. THE CASE WAS ASSESSED FOR AY 2007-08 U/S 143(3) BY THE DEPARTMENT ITSELF ON 29.12.2009. THEREFORE, THE QUE STION OF NON-EXISTENCE OF THIS CO. DOES NOT ARISE 2 ARSEY HOSIERY PVT. LTD THE CASE WAS ASSESSED FOR AY 2007-08 U/S 143(3) BY THE DEPARTMENT ITSELF ON 01.12.2009. THEREFORE, THE QUE STION OF NON-EXISTENCE OF THIS CO. DOES NOT ARISE. 3 TWINCE TRADERS PVT. LTD. THE IT RETURN FOR AY 2011-12 WAS ELECTRONICALLY FIL ED ON 08.03.2012 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO.348672971080312. THIS INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE IN THE I T DEPARTMENT S OWN DATA BASE. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NON-EXISTENCE OF THIS CO. DOES NOT ARISE. 4 CHARDHAM IMPEX PVT. LTD. THE CASE WAS ASSESSED FOR AY 1995-96 U/S 143(3) BY THE DEPARTMENT ITSELF ON 26.10.1998. THE IT RETURN FOR THE AY 2010-11 WAS ALSO FILED ELECTRONICALLY ON 31.03.2011 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT NO.211242421310311. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NONEXISTENCE OF THIS CO. DOES NOT ARISE . 5 VIDUR BUILDERS PVT. LTD. COPY OF AUDITED BALANCE SHEET FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31.03.2006 HAS BEEN FILED. IT RECORDS COULD NOT BE PRODUCED 6 TEJENDER FABRICATION PVT. LTD. THE ITR FOR AY 2010-11 WAS ELECTRONICALLY FILED ON 27.09.2010 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO. 161381151270910. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NONEXISTENCE OF THIS CO. DOES NOT ARISE. 7 KAISER MARKETING PVT. LTD. THE CASE WAS ASSESSED FOR AY 2006-07 U/S 143(3) BY THE DEPARTMENT ITSELF ON 26.12.2008. THE ITR FOR AY 201 0-11 WAS ELECTRONICALLY FILED ON 25.09.2010 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO. 159633301250910. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NON-EXISTENCE OF THIS CO. DOES NOT ARIS E. 8 INDOLON HOSIERY P LTD. ITR FOR AY 2011-12 WAS FILED ON 29.03.2012 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO.370700291290312. COPIES OF MCA FILINGS AND CONFIRMATIONS FROM THE DIRECTORS WERE A LSO FILED. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NON-EXISTENCE OF THIS CO. DOES NOT ARISE. 9 BRAINSOFT INFO CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. ITR FOR AY 2011-12 WAS FILED ON 31.03.2012 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO.381694521310312. COPIES OF AUDITED BALANCE SHEET AND CONFIRMATIONS FROM THE DIRECTORS WERE ALSO FILED. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NON- EXISTENCE OF THIS CO. DOES NOT ARISE. 10 CHINTAPURNI BUILDERS PVT. LTD. ITR FOR AY 2008-09 WAS FILED ON 26.09.2008 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO.40183200260908 AND ITR FOR AY 2011-12 WAS FILED ON 31.03.2012 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO.380735971310312. COPIES OF AUDITED BALANCE SHEET , SHARE APPLICATION AND BANK STATEMENT WERE ALSO FILE D. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NON-EXISTENCE OF THIS CO . DOES NOT ARISE. 11 MIDAS TOUCH MEDIA PVT. LTD. ITR FOR AY 2008-09 WAS FILED ON 22.03.2009 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO.60418950220309. COPIES OF AUDITED BALANCE SHEET, SHARE APPLICATION AND BANK STATEMENT WERE ALSO FILED. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NON-EXISTENC E OF THIS CO. DOES NOT ARISE. 12 MULTITECH ITR FOR AY 2008-09 WAS FILED ON 29.03.2009 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO.64402491290309 AND ITR FOR AY 2011-12 WAS FILED ON 29.03.2012 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO.370520691290312. COPIES OF AUDITED BALANCE SHEET AND BANK STATEMENT WERE ALSO FILED. THEREFORE, THE 10 ITA NO. 302/DEL/2014 SEMICONDUCTORS PVT. LTD. QUESTION OF NON-EXISTENCE OF THIS CO. DOES NOT ARIS E. 13 RIBBEL MANUFACTURERS & EXPORTERS PVT. LTD. ITR FOR AY 2008-09 WAS FILED ON 22.03.2009 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO.60418950220309. COPIES OF AUDITED BALANCE SHEET, SHARE APPLICATION AND BANK STATEMENT WERE ALSO FILED. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NON-EXISTENC E OF THIS CO. DOES NOT ARISE. 14 SCIENT INFORMATICS INDIA PVT. LTD. THE CASE WAS ASSESSED FOR AY 2007-08 U/S 143(3) BY THE DEPARTMENT ITSELF ON 16.12.2009. THEREFORE, THE QUE STION OF NON-EXISTENCE OF THIS CO. DOES NOT ARISE. 15 SEVBRO DOMESTIC APPLIANCES PVT. LTD. ITR FOR AY 2008-09 WAS FILED ON 22.03.2009 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO.60434730220309. COPIES OF AUDITED BALANCE SHEET, SHARE APPLICATION AND BANK STATEMENT WERE ALSO FILED. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NON-EXISTENC E OF THIS CO. DOES NOT ARISE. 16 SKYLINK SOFTWARES PVT. LTD. ITR FOR AY 2008-09 WAS FILED ON 22.03.2009 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO.60411150220309 AND ITR FOR AY 2011-12 WAS FILED ON 31.03.2012 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO.381257601310312. COPIES OF AUDITED BALANCE SHEET , SHARE APPLICATION AND BANK STATEMENT WERE ALSO FILE D. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NON-EXISTENCE OF THIS CO . DOES NOT ARISE. 17 APT PROPERTIES PVT. LTD. COPY OF AUDITED BALANCE SHEET FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31.03.2009 HAS BEEN FILED. IT RECORDS COULD NOT BE PRODUCED. HOWEVER, MCA MASTER DATA SHOWS THE CO. ACTIVE AND HAVING FILED THE BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2010. THUS, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE CO. DI D NOT EXIST AS ON 31.03.2009. CO. APPEARS TO HAVE THE SOU RCE FOR THE INVESTMENT. 18 DHANVRIDHI FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD. ITR FOR AY 2011-12 WAS FILED ON 05.03.2012 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO.346599241030312. COPY OF THE AUDITED BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2009 WAS ALSO FIL ED. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NON-EXISTENCE OF THIS CO . DOES NOT ARISE. CO. APPEARS TO HAVE SOURCE FOR THE INVES TMENT 19 INTELIFE MARKETING PVT. LTD. ITR FOR AY 2011-12 WAS FILED ON 31.03.2012 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO.382068051310312. COPY OF THE AUDITED BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2009 WAS ALSO FIL ED. MCA MASTER DATA SHOWS THE CO. ACTIVE AND HAVING FIL ED THE BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2010. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NON-EXISTENCE OF THIS CO. DOES NOT ARIS E. 20 KAY BUILDWELL PVT. LTD. ITR FOR AY 2011-12 WAS FILED ON 30.03.2012 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO.374037341300312. COPY OF THE AUDITED BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2009 WAS ALSO FIL ED. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NON-EXISTENCE OF THIS CO . DOES NOT ARISE. CO. APPEARS TO HAVE THE SOURCE FOR INVES TMENT. 21 KELA DEVI BUILDERS PVT. LTD. ITR FOR AY 2011-12 WAS FILED ON 20.03.2012 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO.356042621200312. COPY OF THE AUDITED BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2009 WAS ALSO FIL ED. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NON-EXISTENCE OF THIS CO . DOES NOT ARISE. CO. APPEARS TO HAVE THE SOURCE FOR INVES TMENT. 22 WISEMAN MARKETING COPY OF AUDITED BALANCE SHEET FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31.03.2006 HAS BEEN FILED. IT RECORDS COULD NOT BE PRODUCED. 11 ITA NO. 302/DEL/2014 PVT. LTD. 23 SHWETA MEHANDI PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED FOR AY 2009-10 U/S 143(1) BY THE DEPARTMENT (CPC) ITSELF ON 17.09.2010 AND REFUN D ISSUED. ITR FOR AY WAS FILED ON 26.09.2010 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO. 160329921260910. COPY OF THE AUDITED BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2009 WAS ALSO FIL ED. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NON-EXISTENCE OF THIS CO . DOES NOT ARISE. CO. APPEARS TO HAVE THE SOURCE FOR INVES TMENT. 24 VAISHNO DEVI & BUILDING DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. ITR FOR AY 2011-12 WAS FILED ON 20.03.2012 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO.356036291200312. COPY OF THE AUDITED BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2009 WAS ALSO FIL ED. THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF NON-EXISTENCE OF THIS CO . DOES NOT ARISE. CO. APPEARS TO HAVE THE SOURCE FOR INVES TMENT. 5.4. IT WOULD BE SEEN FROM THE ABOVE TABLE THAT IT CANNOT BE CONCLUDED THAT THE SHARE APPLICANT COMPANIES DID NOT EXIST OR THAT THE TRANSACTIONS WE RE NOT ESTABLISHED. ONLY IN TWO CASE, VIZ. VIDUR BU ILDERS PVT. LTD. AND WISEMAN MARKETING PVT. LTD., COPIES O F THE ITRS COULD NOT BE FURNISHED BY THE APPELLANT. EVEN IN THESE CASES, COPIES OF THE BALANCE SHEETS F ILED INDICATE THAT THE COMPANIES HAD THE FUNDS / SO URCES TO MAKE INVESTMENT IN THE SHARE APPLICATION TOWARDS THE APPELLANT COMPANY. THE REVENUE CANNOT BE TAKIN G TWO DIFFERENT STANDS. ON THE ONE HAND THE REVENUE I S ACCEPTING AND ADMITTING COMPLIANCE TO ITS OWN LAW S AND PROCEDURE BY WAY OF FILING OF ITR, PAYMENT OF T AXES, PROCESSING AND ISSUE OF REFUNDS, AND ALSO TAX SCRUTINY OF CASES. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE REVENUE C ANNOT TAKE THE STAND THAT THE SHARE APPLICATIONS AR E UNEXPLAINED AS SOME OF THE SHARE APPLICANT COMPANIE S COULD NOT BE PHYSICALLY LOCATED BY THE INSPECTOR AT THE GIVEN ADDRESS. FOR THIS THERE COULD BE SEVERAL REASONS - THE INSPECTOR MAY NOT HAVE DONE HIS JOB PROPERLY, OR THE APPLICANT COMPANIES MAY HAVE CHANG ED ADDRESS. THERE IS NO COMMENT BY THE REVENUE ON THE REPLIES ADMITTEDLY RECEIVED FROM THE APPLICANT COMPANIES BY POST. THERE IS NO COMMENT ON THE MERIT OF THE DOCUMENTS FILED. WHEN THE APPELLANT WAS NOT CON FRONTED WITH THE INSPECTORS REPORT, IT CANNOT BE ALLEGED BY THE REVENUE THAT THE APPELLANT FAILED TO ESTABLISH THE TRANSACTIONS. THE APPELLANT WAS EVEN SEARCHED BY THE REVENUE BUT NO SUCH EVIDENCE WAS FO UND. PUBLIC FUNCTIONARIES MUST ACT IN A TRANSPARENT AND NON-PARTISAN MANNER. THIS DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE THE CASE. 5.5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE ADDITIONS MADE IN VA RIOUS YEARS, I.E. RS.83,00,000/- FOR AY 2006-07 (A.NO.361/13-14), RS. 12,00,000/- FOR AY 2007-08 (A .NO.360/13- 14), RS.80,75,000/- FOR AY 2008-09 (A.NO.359/13-14), RS,2,58,00,000/- FOR AY 2009-10 ( A.NO.358/13-14), AND RS.75,00,000/- FOR AY 2010-11 (A.NO.357/13-14), ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE APPLICATIONS / CAPITAL RECEIVED CANNOT BE HELD TO BE UNEXPLAINED . THE CONCLUSION IS NOT TENABLE IN VIEW OF THE EVIDEN CE PRODUCED AND MUST BE DELETED. I HOLD SO ACCORDIN GLY FOR ALL THESE ASSESSMENT YEARS. THE RESPECTIVE ADDI TIONS MADE FOR THESE AYS ARE DELETED. IN THE PRESENT ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09, THE FACTS A RE IDENTICAL AND THE CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY FOLLOWED THE ORDER OF A.Y. 2006- 07 PASSED BY THE SAME CIT(A). THERE IS NO NEED TO INTERFERE WITH THE FIND INGS OF THE CIT(A). THEREFORE, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 9. THUS, THE PARTIES MENTIONED IN PRESENT ASSESSEE S CASE WERE HELD GENUINE, CREDITWORTHINESS AND ITS IDENTITY WAS ALSO ACCEPTED IN CASE OF SUPERB 12 ITA NO. 302/DEL/2014 DEVELOPERS (SUPRA). WE FURTHER OBSERVE THAT EACH AN D EVERY CASE LAW CITED BY THE LD. DR ALSO HIGHLIGHTS THE POINT THAT THE GENUI NENESS, IDENTITY AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE SHARE APPLICANT PARTIES HAV E TO BE ESTABLISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE SAME HAS BEEN DO NE BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE ONUS WAS DISCHARGED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WHICH WAS PROPERLY TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE CIT (A). THUS, T HE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY INTERFERENCE AND APPEAL OF THE REVE NUE IS DISMISSED. 8. IN RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 21 ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2021. SD/- SD/- (R. K. PANDA) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL M EMBER DATED: 21/01/2021 R. NAHEED COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI 13 ITA NO. 302/DEL/2014