Fragrance Construction Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 3098/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7026 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 2
• Next Hearing Date: 20-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 18-05-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: UMESH CHANDER DUBEY
• Assessee Lawyers: AJAY BHAGWANI
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Accommodation entries; Reason to believe; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 143(3); 147; 148; 6

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 3098/DEL/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 M/S. FRAGRANCE CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD., M-11, MIDDLE CIRCLE, CONNAUGHT CIRCUS, NEW DELHI 110 001 VS. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-32, ARA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTENSION, NEW DELHI 110 055 (PAN : AACF1922H) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SH. AJAY BHAGWANI, CA RESPONDENT BY SH. UMESH CHANDER DUBEY, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 21-09-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 04-10-2016 ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AG AINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS)-30, NEW DELHI, DATED 28.1.2015, RAISING THE FOLLOWING GRO UNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XXX, NEW DELHI ARE BAD IN LAW AND VOID AB INITIO. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE ADDITION OF RS.15LACS WAS NOT PERMISSIBLE IN THE ASSESSMENT MADE U/S 147/143(3) OF THE ACT AS THE INCOME DECLARED AND ASSESSED ON 2 ITA NO. 3098/DEL/2015 AY: 2005-06 24.12.2007 U/S 143(3) AT RS.2,30,413/- OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED. 3. THAT WITHOUT PREJUDICE, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, AND CONFIRMED BY CIT(A), IS BAD ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN AS MUCH AS IT SUFFERS FROM THE VICE OF VIOLATION OF THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE A ND DENIAL OF OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD, RENDERING THE ASSESSMENT VOID AB INITIO. 4. THAT WITHOUT PREJUDICE ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE CIT(A) ERR ED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.15,00,000/- AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. 5. THE APPELLANT CRAVES PERMISSION TO ADD, AMEND, ALTER OR VARY ALL OR ANY GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON OR BE FORE THE DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 2. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED I TS RETURN OF INCOME AT RS. 57,150/- ON 31.10.2005. THE ASSESSMENT U NDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 DATED 24.12.2007 WAS COMPLETED AT AN INCOME OF RS. 2,30,413/-. SUBSEQUE NTLY, THE INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED FROM THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIR CLE -22, NEW DELHI, THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED ACCOMMODAT ION ENTRIES OF RS. 15,00,000/- FROM THE GLOBAL TRUST BAN K ACCOUNT OF M/S NAMRATA MARKETING PVT. LTD., WHICH IS FLOATED / CONTROLLED BY SH. SK GUPTA, DURING THE FY 2004-05 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. THEREFORE, TO REASSESS TH E INOME WHICH HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 147 OF THE ACT, AFTER OBTAINING THE NECESSARY APPROV AL OF THE 3 ITA NO. 3098/DEL/2015 AY: 2005-06 CIT, CENTRAL III, NEW DELHI, NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED ON 29.3.2012 WHICH WAS DULY SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAID NOTICE, THE ASSESSEE FILED I TS RETURN OF INCOME FROM THE AY 2005-06 ON 27.4.2012 DECLARING T OTAL INCOME OF RS. 57,150/-. THE ASSESSEE WAS PROVIDED CO PY OF REASONS RECORDED FOR INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S. 147/148 OF THE ACT ALONGWITH NOTICE U/S. 148 DATED 29.3.2012. THE REAFTER, NOTICES U/S. 143(2) OF THE ACT DATED 19.9.2012 WAS I SSUED FOR 10.10.2012. BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSE E HAD RAISED OBJECTION AGAINST THE VALIDITY OF INITIATION OF REOPENING PROCEEDING BUT COULD NOT SUCCEED. IT RAISED THIS ISS UE AGAIN BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPE ALS) BUT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HA S ALSO DECIDED THE ISSUE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE, HENCE, THE P RESENT APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT. 3. AT THE OUTSET OF HEARING, LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IN TH E CASE, REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED UNDER SECTI ON 147 OF THE ACT BY WAY OF ISSUING NOTICE UNDER 148 OF THE A CT ON 29 TH MARCH, 2012 AFTER RECORDING REASONS FOR REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT. THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDING WAS CHALLEN GED BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPE ALS), HOWEVER, COULD NOT SUCCEED, AND THUS, THE ASSESSEE HA S CHALLENGED THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. IN SUPPORT OF GROUND NO. 2 OF THE PRESENT APPEAL , LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT IN THE CAS E OF OTHER CONCERNS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ALSO, IDENTICAL REA SONS WERE RECORDED FOR REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT BUT THE TR IBUNAL IN 4 ITA NO. 3098/DEL/2015 AY: 2005-06 THOSE CASES HELD THE INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS UNDE R SECTION 147 OF THE ACT AS INVALID. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRE SENTATIVE GIVEN A LIST OF SUCH CASES, WHEREIN THE INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 147 WAS HELD INVALID, AS UNDER: I. M/S REMARKABLE ESTATES PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT, ITA NO. 4515/DEL/2013 FOR AY 2004-05 II. M/S. SUNAINA TOWERS PVT. LTD., ITA NO. 4514/DEL/2013, DATED 11.03.2016 FOR AY : 2004-05 III. M/S. ANUPAM TOWERS PVT. LTD., ITA NO. 4516/DEL/2013, DATED 17.05.2016 FOR AY: 2004-06 IV. M/S. VASUNDRA PROMOTERS PVT. LTD., ITA NO. 4014/DEL/2014, DATED 28.04.2016 FOR AY : 2004-05 V. M/S. WESTLAND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., ITA NO. 4984/DEL/2013, DATED 28.06.2016 FOR AY: 2004-05 5. ACCORDINGLY, HE REQUESTED THAT THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN THE INSTANT CASE ALSO BE HELD AS INV ALID DUE TO NON-APPLICATION OF MIND BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 6. ON THE OTHER HAND, LEARNED SR. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AU THORITIES, HOWEVER, COULD NOT CONTROVERT THAT THE REASONS RECO RDED IN THE INSTANT CASE ARE IDENTICAL TO THE REASONS RECORDED IN THE CASES BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL (SUPRA) RELIED UPON BY THE LEAR NED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE. 7. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED T HE MATERIAL ON RECORD, INCLUDING THE ORDERS OF THE TRIB UNAL CITED BY THE ASSESSEE. I FIND THAT IN THE CASE OF M/S. SUNAINA TOWERS PVT. LTD. (SUPRA), REASONS RECORDED HAVE BEEN REPROD UCED IN PARA 7 OF THE ORDER, WHICH ARE AS UNDER: 7. NOW, WE HAVE TO EXAMINE THE REASONS RECORDED IN THE PRESENT CASE BEFORE US IN VIEW OF THE RATIOS LA ID DOWN IN THE ABOVE CITED DECISION OF THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIO NAL HIGH 5 ITA NO. 3098/DEL/2015 AY: 2005-06 COURT RECENTLY PRONOUNCED ON 08.10.2015 TO VERIFY THE CONTENTION OF THE LEARNED AR THAT WHILE FORMING THE BELIEF THAT INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMEN T ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED BY IT, THE ASSESS ING OFFICER HAS NOT APPLIED HER MIND. THE REASONS RECORDED IN TH E PRESENT CASE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR THE PURPO SE ARE BEING REPRODUCED HEREUNDER: 2. AS PER THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 19, NEW DELHI, A SURVEY OPERATION W AS CONDUCTED IN THE S.K. GUPTA GROUP OF CASES ON 20.11.2007, ARUNACHAL BUILDING, 19-BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI-1100 01 AND 1007-1008, ARUNACHAL BUILDING , 19- BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110001. DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY PROCEEDINGS SEVERAL LEDGER ACCOUNT S MAINTAINED IN TALLY FOR THE F.Y. 2003-04, BESIDES VA RIOUS OTHER DOCUMENTS/ACCOUNTS WERE FOUND. FURTHER, DURIN G THE COURSE OF SURVEY & ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. SH. S.K. GUPTA ADMITTED THAT HE HAD BEEN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES TO VARIOUS PERSONS/BENEFICIAR IES THROUGH A LARGE NO. OF SHELL COMPANIES/CONCERNS FLOA TED BY & EFFECTIVELY CONTROLLED BY HIM. HE OPERATED A NUMBER OF ACCOUNTS IN THE SAME BANK/BRANCH OR IN DIFFERENT BRANCHES, IN THE NAMES OF THESE SHELL COMPANIES/CONCERNS. AFTER RECEIVING CASH FROM THE BENEFICIARIES, SH. S.K. GUPTA USED TO DEPOSIT THE SA ME IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF ONE OF THE THESE SHELL COMPANIES/CONCERNS. THEN HE USED TO ROUTE THE ENTRIE S THROUGH TWO TO FOUR ACCOUNTS OF THESE SHELL COMPANIES/CONCERNS BEFORE ULTIMATELY TRANSFERRING S AME TO THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF TIRE BENEFICIARIES TO GIVE THE COLOR OF GENUINENESS TO THESE TRANSACTIONS. 3. FURTHER, AS PER THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM TH E ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, NEW DELHI, M/S. SUNAINA TO WERS PVT. LTD. HAS RECEIVED AMOUNT OF RS.25,00,000 VIDE CHEQUE NO. 778926 DATED 10.10.2003, FROM THE FEDERAL BANK ACCOUNT OF M/S. CHANDERPRABHU FINANCIAL SERVICES/CHANDERPRABHU FINANCE & SECURITIES LTD., A SHELL COMPANY/CONCERN FLOATED/CONTROLLED BY SHRI S. K. GUPTA. 6 ITA NO. 3098/DEL/2015 AY: 2005-06 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, I HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE T HAT AMOUNT/INCOME OF RS.25,00,000 HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT FOR THE A.Y. 2004-05 FOR FAILURE ON THE P ART OF THE ASSESSEE TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRULY ALL MAT ERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR ITS ASSESSMENT WITHIN THE MEANI NG OF SECTION 147 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. 5. ISSUE NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 . 8. THE TRIBUNAL IN PARA 8 OF THE ORDER HELD THAT TH E ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT APPLIED HIS OWN MIND WHILE RECORDIN G THE REASONS. THE RELEVANT PARA OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBU NAL IS AS UNDER: 8. THE VERY PERUSAL OF THE REASONS, IT IS APPARENT THAT THESE WERE BASED ON THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM A CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, NEW DELHI AFTER NARRATION OF WHI CH, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS SIMPLY RECORDED THAT SHE HAS REASON TO BELIEVE THAT AMOUNT/INCOME OF RS.25 LACS HAS ESCA PED ASSESSMENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 FOR FAIL URE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRUL Y ALL MATERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR ITS ASSESSMENT WITHIN THE MEANING OF SEC. 147 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. NO TICE UNDER SEC. 148 OF THE ACT HAS ACCORDINGLY BEEN ISSUE D BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IN THE ABOVE CITED DECISIONS OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT, IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED BY THE HON 'BLE HIGH COURT THAT SUCH TYPE OF CONCLUSION IS UNHELPFU L IN UNDERSTANDING WHETHER THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD APP LIED HIS MIND TO THE MATERIALS THAT HE TALKS ABOUT PARTI CULARLY SINCE HE DID NOT DESCRIBE WHAT THOSE MATERIAL WERE. HON'BLE HIGH COURT HAS OBSERVED FURTHER THAT ONCE THE DATE ON WHICH THE SO-CALLED ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES WERE PROV IDED IS KNOWN, IT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DIFFICULT FOR THE ASSESSING OFFICER, IF HE HAD IN FACT UNDERTAKEN THE EXERCISE, TO MAKE A REFERENCE TO THE MANNER IN WHICH THOSE VERY ENTRIES WERE PROVIDED IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS HEL D THAT WITHOUT FORMING A PRIMA FACIE OPINION, ON THE BASIS OF SUCH MATERIAL, IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE FOR THE ASSESSING OFF ICER TO HAVE SIMPLY CONCLUDED, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE ASSE SSEE 7 ITA NO. 3098/DEL/2015 AY: 2005-06 COMPANY HAS INTRODUCED ITS OWN UNACCOUNTED MONEY IN ITS BANK BY WAY OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. THE BASIC REQUIREMENT IS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER MUST APPL Y HIS MIND TO THE MATERIAL IN ORDER TO FORM REASONS TO BE LIEVE THAT THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ESCAPED ASSESSM ENT. SUCH BASIC REQUIREMENT WHILE RECORDING THE REASONS FOR INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS UNDER SEC. 147 OF THE ACT IS MISSING IN THE PRESENT CASE BEFORE US. AS IT IS EVI DENT IN THE REASONS RECORDED, REPRODUCED HEREINABOVE, THE ASSES SING OFFICER HAS SIMPLY RECORDED THE INFORMATION RECEIVE D FROM HER COLLEAGUE AND WITHOUT MAKING ANY EXERCISE OF HE R MIND ON THOSE INFORMATION TO FORM HER OWN REASONS TO BEL IEVE FOR THE ESCAPED ASSESSMENT OF RS. 25 LACS, HAS ISSUED N OTICE UNDER SEC. 148 OF THE ACT. WE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWIN G THE RATIOS LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT OF DELHI IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. G&G PHARMA INDIA LTD. ( SUPRA), HOLD THAT THE REASONS TO BELIEVE RECORDED BY THE AS SESSING OFFICER IN THE PRESENT CASE TO INITIATE THE PROCEED INGS UNDER SEC. 147 OF THE ACT WITHOUT APPLICATION OF HER OWN MIND ON THE INFORMATION RECEIVED WERE NOT AS PER THE REQUIR EMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAW LAID DOWN UNDER SEC. 147 O F THE ACT, HENCE, THE INITIATION OF THE PROCEEDINGS WAS N OT VALID AND NOR THE ASSESSMENT MADE IN FURTHERANCE TO THE S AID INITIATION OF THE PROCEEDINGS. THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED UNDER SEC. 147 READ WITH 143(3) OF THE ACT IN THE PRESENT CASE IN QUESTION IS THUS HELD AS VOID-AB-INITIO. THE GROUND NOS. 1 AND 2 ARE ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 9. WHEN I ADVERT TO THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, I FIND THAT THE COPY OF THE REASONS RECORDED HAS BEEN REPRODUCE D BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IN PAR A 3.1(1.1)(2) OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, WHICH I AM REP RODUCING FOR THE PURPOSE OF CLARITY AS UNDER:- 2. AS PER THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-22 NEW DELHI, A SURVEY OPERATION WAS CONDUCTED IN THE SURESH KUMAR GUPTA GROUP OF CASES ON 20.11.2007, AT 308, ARUNACHAL BUILDING, 19-BARAKHAMB A ROAD, NEW DELHI-1100 01 AND 1007-1008, ARUNACHAL BUILDING, 19- BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110001. 8 ITA NO. 3098/DEL/2015 AY: 2005-06 DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY PROCEEDINGS SEVERAL LED GER ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED IN TALLY FOR THE F.Y. 2004-05, BESIDES VARIOUS OTHER DOCUMENTS/ACCOUNTS WERE FOUND . FURTHER, DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY & ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. SH. S.K. GUPTA ADMITTED THAT HE HAD BEEN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES TO VARIOUS PERSONS/BENEFICIARIES THROUGH A LARGE NO. OF SHELL COMPANIES/CONCERNS FLOATED BY & EFFECTIVELY CONTROL LED BY HIM. HE OPERATED A NUMBER OF ACCOUNTS IN THE SAME BANK/BRANCH OR IN DIFFERENT BRANCHES, IN THE NAMES OF THESE SHELL COMPANIES/CONCERNS. AFTER RECEIVING CAS H FROM THE BENEFICIARIES, SH. S.K. GUPTA USED TO DEPO SIT THE SAME IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF ONE OF THE THESE SH ELL COMPANIES/CONCERNS. THEN HE USED TO ROUTE THE ENTRIE S THROUGH TWO TO FOUR ACCOUNTS OF THESE SHELL COMPANIES/CONCERNS BEFORE ULTIMATELY TRANSFERRING S AME TO THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF TIRE BENEFICIARIES TO GIVE THE COLOR OF GENUINENESS TO THESE TRANSACTIONS. 3. FURTHER, AS PER THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM TH E ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-22, NEW DELHI, AS PER LEDGER ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED IN TALLY BY SH. SK GUPTA, FOR TH E FY 2004-05, M/S FRAGRANCE CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. HAS RECEIVED AMOUNT OF RS.15,00,000 (COLUMN 8) THROUGH CHEQUES/PO/DD/BC (COLUMN 3 & 4) ISSUED FROM THE VARIOUS BANK ACCOUNTS (COLUMN 6) OF VARIOUS COMPANI ES / CONCERNS (COLUMN 5) FLOATED / CONTROLLED BY SH. SK GUPTA DURING THE FY 2004-05. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, I HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE T HAT AMOUNT/INCOME OF RS.15,00,000 HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT FOR THE A.Y. 2005-06 FOR FAILURE ON THE P ART OF THE ASSESSEE TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRULY ALL MAT ERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR ITS ASSESSMENT WITHIN THE MEANI NG OF SECTION 147 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. 5. ISSUE NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 . 10. ON COMPARISON OF THE REASONS RECORDED BY THE AS SESSING OFFICER IN THE INSTANT CASE AND IN THE CASE OF M/S. SUNAINA 9 ITA NO. 3098/DEL/2015 AY: 2005-06 TOWERS PVT. LTD. (SUPRA), I FIND THAT THE REASONS RECO RDED ARE IDENTICAL, EXCEPT THE CHANGE OF AMOUNT INVOLVED. THUS , RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. SUNAINA TOWERS PVT. LTD. (SUPRA), I HOLD THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT APPLIED HIS MIND WHILE RECORDING TH E REASONS TO BELIEVE THAT THE INCOME ESCAPED THE ASSESSMENT AND HE HAS ACTED ONLY IN A MECHANICAL MANNER. THUS, THE REASSE SSMENT PROCEEDINGS COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 147 R.W.S. 143 OF THE ACT IN THE PRESENT CASE IN QUESTION ARE THUS, HELD AS VO ID-AB-INITIO. 11. SINCE I HAVE ALREADY QUASHED THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE OTHER GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RENDERED INFRUCTUOUS. 12. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED. THE DECISION IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04 -10-2016. SD/- (H .S. SIDHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 04-10-2016. COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI 10 ITA NO. 3098/DEL/2015 AY: 2005-06