ITO, ward- 35(3), New Delhi V. Rekha Gupta, Delhi

ITA 3342/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9454 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-07-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 08-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AGAINST DATED PASSED
• Keywords: Bogus purchase; Additional evidence
• Section: 133(6); 37(1); 68; 69

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO. 3342/DEL/2018 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: F NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA ACCOUNTANT MEM BER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDI CIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 3342/DEL/2018 (A.Y 2013-14) (THROUGH VIDEO CONFER ENCING) ITO WARD-35(3) ROOM NO. 809, 8 TH FLOOR, E-2 BLOCK, PRATYAKSH KAR BHAWAN, CIVIC CENTRE, DR. S. P. MUKHERJEE MARG, MINTO ROAD, NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) VS REKH A GUPT A 110-A, DDA FLATS SFS, GULABI BAGH, NEW DELHI PAN:AANPG6898F (RESPONDENT) ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST ORDER D ATED 08/12/2017 PASSED BY CIT(A)-12, NEW DELHI FOR ASSESSMENT YEA R 2013-14. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE AS UNDER:- 1) THE ID.CIT(A) HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON FACTS I N ALLOWING THE EXPENSES OF PURCHASE OF GOLD BARS OF RS.4.57 CRORES FROM M/S .N.K.MEDALLION GOLD PVT. LTD. WITHOUT ESTABLISHING ESSENTIAL INGREDIENTS OF FACTUM OF SUCH PURCHASES NAMELY WITHOUT PRODUCING ANY EVIDENCE BEYOND PURCHA SE BILLS, WITHOUT EXPLAINING HOW TWO BILLS FROM SAME PARTY ARE SO DIF FERENT, WITHOUT FURNISHING PROOF OF GOLD TRANSPORTATION AND DELIVERY, WITHOUT GIVING ANY REASON AS TO HOW APPELLANT BY SH. FARHAT KHAN, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY SH. K. SAMPATH, ADV DATE OF HEARING 05.07.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 30.07.2021 2 ITA NO. 3342/DEL/2018 SUCH PURCHASES COULD BE MADE BY ASSESSEE WITHOUT MA KING A SINGLE PENNY PAYMENT AGAINST IT DESPITE THE FACT THAT MAXIMUM CR EDIT ALLOWED IN GOLD BAR TRADING IS A WEEK TIME AND ULTIMATELY THE ACCOUNT W AS SETTLED NEXT YEAR BY RETURN OF SUCH GOLD. 2) THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS IN ALLOWING PURCHASE EXPENSES OF RS.4.57 CRORES BY STATING THAT SUCH PAR TY M/S.N.K.MEDALLION GOLD LTD. WAS GENUINE ALTHOUGH NOTICE ISSUED U/S.133(6) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BY ASSESSING OFFICER ON SUCH PARTY WAS NOT REP LIED BY THEM. 3) THE ID.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE MA NDATE OF THE RULE 46A(1) OF THE IT RULES, 1962 WHICH DEBARS THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE, WHETHER ORAL OR DOCUMENTARY, OTHER THAN THE EVIDENC E PRODUCED BY HIM DURING THE COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFI CER, EXCEPT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES ENUMERATED IN THE CLAUSE (A) TO (D) O F THE RULES 46A(1) OF THE IT RULES, 1962, AND NON AVAILABILITY OF THE SAME IN TH E ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, OR/AND ITS GOING TO THE VERY ROOT OF THE MATTER TO BE DECIDED UPON BY THE ID. CIT(A) HAS NOT BEEN CONTEMPLATED BY THE LEGISLATURE IN THE SCHEME OF THE RULES 46A(1) OF THE IT RULES, 1962. 4) THE ID.CIT(A) HAS NOT APPRECIATED THAT THE ASSESSE E FAILED TO DISCHARGE THE PRIMARY ONUS CAST UPON HER BY SECTION 37(1) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 BY PROVING WITH DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE THAT THE EXPENDITURE OF R S.4,57,42,900/- CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSEE TO M/S.N.K.GOLD M EDALLION PVT. LTD. WAS GENUINELY INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE WHOLLY AND EXCLU SIVELY FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE ASSESSEE'S BUSINESS. 5) THE ID.CIT(A) HAS NOT APPRECIATED THAT THE ASSESSE E'S CONDUCT IN RESPECT OF HER CONTENDED PURCHASES FROM M/S.N.K.GOLD MEDALLION PVT. LTD. HAS NOT BEEN IN HARMONY WITH PREPONDENCE OF HUMAN PROBABILITIES. 6) THE ID.CIT(A) HAS NOT APPRECIATED THAT THE ASSESSE E FAILED TO PROVE THE CREDIT WORTHINESS OF THE LENDERS AND ALSO THE GENUI NENESS OF TRANSACTION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY PRODUCING RELEVANT CREDIBLE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN RESPECT OF UNSECURED LOAN OF RS.39,25,0 00/-, THE LENDERS OF WHICH DID NOT EVEN HAVE COMMENSURATE INCOME AS PER THEIR RESPECTIVE RETURN OF 3 ITA NO. 3342/DEL/2018 INCOME. - 3. THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND IS CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF GOLD BARS. IN THIS CASE, THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED ON 17/09/2013 DECLARING NET TAXABLE INCOME OF RS.1,34, 410/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF RS.4,57,42,900/- IN RESP ECT OF SALES AND PURCHASE AS WELL AS MADE ADDITION OF RS.60,000/- TOWARDS CERTAI N PURCHASES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO MADE ADDITION OF RS.39,25,00 0/- TOWARDS UNSECURED LOANS ADDITION OF RS. 5,92,000/- TOWARDS UNEXPLAINE D CASH CREDITS AND RS. 20,000/- TOWARDS SALARY WHICH WAS NOT DECLARED. TH US, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF RS. 5,03,39,900/- IN DIFFERENT HEA DS AS STATED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASS ESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL O F THE ASSESSEE. 5. THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS RIGHTLY MADE ADDITION RELATING TO RS. 4,57,42,900/- THEREBY HOLD ING THAT THE PURCHASES MADE FROM M/S N. K. MEDALLION GOLD PVT. LTD. ARE NOT TAL LYING WITH THE TRANSACTDIONS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE PUT UP BEFORE THE CIT(A) WAS ADMITTED WITHOUT ADHER ING TO RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962. THE LD. DR FURTHER SUBMITT ED THAT THE CIT(A) SIMPLY ALLOWED THE EXPENSES OF PURCHASE OF GOLD BARS OF RS .4.57 CRORES FROM M/S N. K. MEDALLION GOLD PVT. LTD. WITHOUT ESTABLISHING ESSE NTIAL INGREDIENTS OF FACTS OF SUCH PURCHASES NAMELY WITHOUT PRODUCING ANY EVIDENC E BEYOND PURCHASE BILLS, WITHOUT EXPLAINING HOW TWO BILLS FROM SAME PARTY AR E SO DIFFERENT AS WELL AS WITHOUT FURNISHING PROOF OF GOLD TRANSPORTATION AND DELIVERY & WITHOUT GIVING ANY REASON AS TO HOW SUCH PURCHASES COULD BE MADE B Y THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT MAKING A SINGLE PENNY PAYMENT AGAINST IT DESPITE TH E FACT THAT MAXIMUM CREDIT ALLOWED IN GOLD BAR TRADING IS A WEEK TIME AND ULTI MATELY THE ACCOUNT WAS SETTLED NEXT YEAR BY RETURN OF SUCH GOLD. THE LD. DR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN ALLOWING PURCHASE EXPENSES OF R S. 4.57 CRORES BY STATING 4 ITA NO. 3342/DEL/2018 THAT SUCH PARTY M/S N. K. MEDALLION GOLD PVT. LTD. WERE GENUINE ALTHOUGH NOTICE ISSUED U/S 133(6) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 196 1 BY ASSESSING OFFICER ON SUCH PARTY WAS NOT REPLIED BY THEM. THE LD. DR FUR THER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO DISCHARGE THE PRIMARY ONUS CAST UPON HER BY SECTION 37(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BY PROVING WITH DOCUMENTAR Y EVIDENCE THAT THE EXPENDITURE OF RS. 4,57,42,900/- CLAIMING TO HAVE B EEN MADE BY THE ASSESSEE TO M/S N. K. MEDALLION GOLD PVT. LTD. WAS GENUINEL Y INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSES OF ASSESSEE S BUSINESS. THE CIT(A) HAS NOT APPRECIATED THAT THE ASSESSEES CONDUCT IN RESP ECT OF HER SAID PURCHASES FROM M/S N. K. MEDALLION GOLD PVT. LTD. HAS NOT BEE N IN HARMONY WITH PREPONDERANCE OF HUMAN PROBABILITIES. THE CIT(A) H AS NOT APPRECIATED THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVE THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF TH E LENDERS AND ALSO THE GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFF ICER BY PRODUCING RELATING CREDIBLE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN RESPECT OF UNSECUR ED LOAN OF RS. 39,25,000/. 6. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY TAKEN A COGNIZANCE OF ALL THE RELEVANT EVIDENCES FILED BEFORE THE APPELLA TE AUTHORITY AS THERE WAS A DISPUTE AND ONLY DETAILS OF RETURN, BANK STATEMENT WERE GIVEN AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND THIS REASON IS SUFFICIEN T TO ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE BY THE CIT(A). THE LD. AR FURTHER SUBMITT ED THAT THE PURCHASES MADE BY THE ASSESSEE WAS ALL ACCEPTED IN THE PAST AND AL SO IN THE PRESENT ASSESSMENT YEAR. ALL THE PURCHASES WERE PROPER AND WAS PROVED BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND NO ADVERSE COMMENT BY THE A SSESSING OFFICER WAS MADE IN HIS REMAND REPORT. THE LD. AR FURTHER SUBMI TTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS TAKEN A COGNIZANCE OF THE LOAN WHICH WAS GIVEN TO T HE NEPHEW AND HER SON AND SINCE IT WAS GIVEN TO SON & NEPHEW, THE SAME WERE I NTEREST FREE LOAN AND IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS, IT HAS BEEN RETURNED OF, AS M/S N . K. MEDALLION GOLD PVT. LTD. WAS NOT IN OPERATIONAL BUSINESS. THUS, THE CI T(A) HAS RIGHTLY ALLOWED THESE TWO CLAIMS. 5 ITA NO. 3342/DEL/2018 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND PERUSED ALL THE REL EVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AS REGARDS TO GROUND NOS. 1 TO 5, IT IS RELEVANT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ALL THE RELEVANT EVIDENCES BEFORE THE CIT (A) AND THE CIT(A) HAS TAKEN COGNIZANCE OF THE REMAND REPORT. THE CIT(A) HAS RIG HTLY ADMITTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES AS IT WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF TH E ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT GIVE N AMPLE OPPORTUNITY TO PRODUCE THE SAME. THUS, CIT(A) RIGHTLY ADMITTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES STRICTLY ADHERING TO RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RUL ES, 1962. FURTHER ON MERIT RELATING TO ADDITION OF RS. 4,57,42,900/- IN RESPEC T OF EXPENDITURE, THE ASSESSEE THROUGH THE EVIDENCES HAS DEMONSTRATED THAT THE EXP ENDITURE INCURRED ON PURCHASES WERE GENUINE AND THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO PR OVED THE IDENTITY AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE PARTIES. THOUGH THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER HAS REMARKED THAT THE NOTICES ISSUED TO THE PARTY UNDER SECTION 133(6) WAS NOT REPLIED, IT WAS NOT POINTED OUT BY THE REVENUE THAT THE PARTY WAS N OT IN EXISTENCE OR THE TRANSACTION WAS NOT GENUINE. IN FACT, ON RECORD, T HE PARTY HAS FILED CONFIRMATIONS AND OTHER RELEVANT DOCUMENTS. THUS, T HE PLEA OF THE LD. DR THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO DISCHARGED ITS ONUS, DOES NO T SURVIVE. WE FIND THAT THE CIT(A) HELD AS UNDER:- 8.6 FROM THE DETAILS FURNISHED, IT IS SEEN THAT ASSESSEE PURCHASED GOLD BAR FROM N.K. GOLD MEDALLION PVT. LTD. WEIGHING 16,895. 9 GMS IN F.Y. 2012-13 AND SOLD THE GOLD BAR TO M/S N.K. GOLD MEDALLION PV T. LTD. WEIGHING 16,335.7 GMS THROUGH FIVE BILLS IN F.Y. 2013-14. BESIDES THE ABOVE THE APPELLANT HAS FILED THE COPY OF THE ID FOR THE ONLINE RETURN FILE D WITH DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND TAXES, GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI, DTD. 23.10.2 012 AND COPY OF THE VERIFICATION REPORT OF ANNEXURE 2A & 2B FILED WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND TAXES ON DIFFERENT DATES IN RESPECT OF SALES TO M/S N.K. GOLD MEDALLION PVT. LTD. M/S N.K. GOLD MEDALLION PVT. LTD. HAS CON FIRMED THE ACCOUNTS OF SWARAN TRADERS FOR F.Y. 2013-14 IN THEIR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT REFLECTING THE AFORESAID TRANSACTIONS. AS PER THE TRADING AND P&L A/C OF SWARAN TRADERS, THE PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN OF THE ASSESSEE FOR F.Y. 2013-14, THE SALES HAVE 6 ITA NO. 3342/DEL/2018 BEEN DECLARED AT RS. 91,S3,97,793/- AND THE GROSS PROFIT HAS BEEN SHOWN AT RS. 10,90,472/-. 8.7 IN THE REJOINDER THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED THAT M/S N.K. GOLD MEDALLION PVT. LTD. HAS SHOWN SWARAN TRADER AS TRADE DEBTOR O F THE SIMILAR AMOUNT OF RS. 457.43 LACS. THE TURNOVER OF M/S N.K. GOLD MEDALLION PVT. LTD. WAS RS. 90,758.28 LACS FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE TURNOVE R OF M/S N.K. GOLD MEDALLION PVT. LTD. WAS SUBSTANTIAL ENOUGH TO TRANSACT THIS VOLUME WITH THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE IS IN FAMILY RE LATION WITH THE DIRECTORS OF M/S N.K. GOLD MEDALLION PVT. LTD. IN THE F.Y. 2013-14, THE BALANCE WAS SETTLED BY WAY OF MULTIPLE SALES FROM SWARAN TRADER S TO M/S N.K. GOLD MEDALLION PVT. LTD. THE TWO CONCERNS HAVE MADE SALE S AND PURCHASES WHICH ARE MUTUALLY INDEPENDENT. THE APPELLANT IS DEALING IN GOLD BULLION WHICH IS PURCHASED AND SOLD AT THE MARKET RATES APPLICABLE O N DAY TO DAY BASIS.; THE QUANTITY OF GOLD BULLION PURCHASED WAS 16,469.09 GRAMS AND THE QUANTITY SOLD WAS 16,335.07 GRAMS. THIS SHOWS THAT THE TRANSACTIONS WERE NOT J UST SQUARING UP THE BALANCES BUT THE ACTUAL TRANSACTION S. THE ASSESSEE HAD ACCOUNTED FOR THE PROFITS AND LOSSES INVOLVED IN TH E TRANSACTIONS AND HAD PAID THE INCOME TAX APPLICABLE. THE ASSESSEE AND M/S N.K . GOLD MEDALLION PVT. LTD. CHARGED AND PAID VAT AS APPLICABLE. THE TURNOV ER OF RS.91,83,97,793/- DECLARED FOR THE F.Y. 2013-14 BY M/S SWARAN TRADERS , PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN OF THE ASSESSEE, PROVES THE SUBSTANTIAL SALES TO MU LTIPLE PARTIES. 8.8. THE APPELLANT HAS REBUTTED THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN WHICH HE MADE THE GROUND FOR REJECTING THE GENUI NENESS OF THE PURCHASE LIKE NON-CHARGING OF INTEREST, NOT PAYING ADVANCE, NOT HAVING ORDERS ETC. IT IS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE IMPUGNED TRANSACTIONS CANNO T BE CALLED SHAM BECAUSE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DERIVED ANY DIRECT OR INDI RECT BENEFITS APART FROM REGULAR PROFITS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT MENT IONED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS TO WHAT TYPE OF BENEFIT THE ASSESSEE OR SE LLER HAVE OR COULD HAVE ACHIEVED BY MAKING THIS TRANSACTION. WHILE PENALIZI NG SOMEONE THE 7 ITA NO. 3342/DEL/2018 AUTHORITIES MUST ESTABLISH THE MOTIVE DERIVED BY TH E ASSESSEE. THE ABSENCE OF ANY COMMENTS FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THIS REGARD, IN THE REMAND REPORT, IS SUBSTANTIAL PROOF OF HIS SATISFACTION ON THE TRANSACTION INVOLVED. HE HAS NOT JUSTIFIED THE STAND TAKEN BY HIS PREDECESSO R WHO MADE THIS ADDITION. THE APPELLANT HAS RELIED ON THE JUDGMENT OF DELHI T RIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF ELAND INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD. VS DEPUTY COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME TAX (2009) 20 DTR DEL (TRIB) 113, WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT IF SALES HAVE BEEN AFFECTE D OUT OF THE PURCHASES MADE FROM THE PARTIES, WHICH D ID NOT CONFIRM THE TRANSACTIONS ON SERVING OF NOTICES U/S 133(6), IT C ANNOT BE SAID THAT THE PURCHASES WERE BOGUS. THE APPELLANT HAS FURTHER REL IED ON THE JUDGMENT OF JAIPUR BENCH OF INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SHUBH LAXMI EXPORT VS ITO 10 DTR 281 IN WHICH IT WAS HELD THAT NO ADDITION FOR BOGUS PURCHASES U/S 69 C COULD MADE FOR DOUBTING PHYSICAL DELIVERY OF PURCHASES MADE. 8.9 I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF T HE CASE, EVIDENCES ON THE RECORD AND THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT. WITH AL L THE DETAILS AND EVIDENCES PRODUCED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND MENTIONED SUPRA, THE IDENTITY OF M/S N.K. GOLD MEDALLION PVT. LTD. CANNO T BE DOUBTED. FURTHER THE IMPUGNED TRANSACTION IS SUPPORTED BY SEVERAL INDEPE NDENT DOCUMENTS IN THE FORM OF PURCHASE INVOICES, LEVY OF VAT, DEPOSIT OF VAT, TRANSACTION RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF BOTH THE PARTIES INVOLVED7T KE~BALANCES SHOWN IN THE AUDITED BALANCE SHEETS OF THE PARTIES, CONFIRMATION FROM THE SELLER PARTY I.E. M/S N.K. GOLD MEDALLION PVT. LTD. ETC. THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER HAS NOT COMMENTED ADVERSELY ON THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES SUB MITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, I DELETE THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESS ING OFFICER AND ALLOW THE GROUND TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS DEALIN G IN GOLD BULLION WHICH IS PURCHASED AND SOLD AT THE MARKET RATES APPLICABLE O N DAY TO DAY BASIS. THE QUANTITY OF GOLD BULLION PURCHASED WAS 16,469.09 GR AMS AND THE QUANTITY SOLD WAS 16,335.07 GRAMS. THIS SHOWS THAT THE TRANSACTIO NS WERE NOT JUST SQUARING 8 ITA NO. 3342/DEL/2018 UP THE BALANCES BUT THE ACTUAL TRANSACTIONS TOOK PL ACE. THE ASSESSEE HAD ACCOUNTED FOR THE PROFITS AND LOSSES INVOLVED IN TH E TRANSACTIONS AND HAD PAID THE INCOME TAX APPLICABLE. THE ASSESSEE AND M/S N.K . GOLD MEDALLION PVT. LTD. CHARGED AND PAID VAT AS APPLICABLE. THE TURNOVER OF RS.91,83,97,793/- DECLARED FOR THE F.Y. 2013-14 BY M/S SWARAN TRADERS , PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN OF THE ASSESSEE, PROVES THE SUBSTANTIAL SALES TO MU LTIPLE PARTIES. THUS, THE CIT(A) HAS GIVEN A DETAILED FINDING AND THERE IS NO NEED TO INTERFERE WITH THE FINDING OF THE CIT(A) AND THE LD. DR COULD NOT CONT ROVERT THE SAME. HENCE, GROUND NOS. 1 TO 5 ARE DISMISSED. 8. AS REGARDS TO GROUND NO. 6, THE CIT(A) HELD AS U NDER: 14.4 THE APPELLANT HAS FILED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES UNDER RULE 46A IN THE FORM OF COPY OF THE BANK ACCOUNTS, COPY OF THE INCO ME TAX RETURNS AND CONFIRMATION OF THE LOANS ALONG WITH THE ADDRESSES OF MR. ANIL GUPTA (HUSBAND OF THE ASSESSEE), MR. BHARAT BHASIN, MS. N UPUR GUPTA (DAUGHTER OF THE ASSESSEE), COPY OF THE BANK ACCOUNT AND LOAN CO NFIRMATION ALONG WITH CURRENT ADDRESS OF M/S DIVYA SHREE FINANCIAL AND CA PITAL SERVICES PVT. LTD. AND M/S ANANT SHREE FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD. TH E APPELLANT, IN THE REJOINDER DTD. 07.12.2017, IN RESPECT OF LOAN FROM MR. BHARAT BHASIN, HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LOAN CREDITOR HAS CONFIRMED THE TRANSACTION. HE HAS FILED DOCUMENTS CALLED FOR REQUIRING U/S 68 OF THE IT ACT . THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE WRONG OBSERVATION THAT THERE WAS CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT IMMEDIATELY BEFORE THE ISSUE OF CHEQUE. IN RESPECT OF M/S DIVYA SHREE FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL SERVICES PVT. LTD. IT IS SUBM ITTED THAT IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHRI SIDDHARTH GUPT A, THE DIRECTOR OF THE LENDER COMPANY FILED MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATIO N AND COPY OF INCOME TAX RETURN. THIS IS ONE OF THE COMPANIES IN WHICH M RS. REKHA GUPTA IS ONE OF THE DIRECTORS. THE OTHER DIRECTORS ARE FAMILY MEMBE RS. SHE WAS HAVING DISPUTE WITH HER SON. THE DISPUTE WAS PENDING IN CO MPANY LAW BOARD. THERE WAS NO BUSINESS IN THIS COMPANY SINCE 2011. D UE TO THIS DISPUTE, 9 ITA NO. 3342/DEL/2018 REQUISITE PAPERS LIKE BALANCE SHEET ETC. WERE NOT F ILED WITH THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES AND INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT. AS REGARDS, TH E SOURCE OF THE AMOUNTS RECEIVED, THE COMPANY HAD SOLD A PROPERTY OF THE CO MPANY FOR RS. 12,15,000/-, OUT OF WHICH RS. 10,00,000/- WAS RECEI VED IN THE BANK BEFORE DAYS OF THE TRANSACTION WITH THE ASSESSEE. THE COPY OF THE SALE DEED IS ATTACHED. OUT OF THE SAME SUM RS.9,80,000/- WAS TRA NSFERRED TO MRS. REKHA GUPTA FOR WHICH COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT IS ENCLO SED. IN REGARD TO THE LOAN AMOUNTING TO RS. 11,45,000/- FROM M/S ANANT SHREE F INANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD., THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE DIRECTOR OF THIS COMPANY HAS MENTIONED ABOUT THIS LOAN TO REKHA GUPTA. MR. SIDDH ARTH GUPTA, THE DIRECTOR OF THIS COMPANY FILED MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF AS SOCIATION ALONG WITH INCOME TAX RETURN. THIS IS ALSO ONE OF THE COMPANIES IN WHICH MRS. REKHA GUPTA IS ONE OF THE DIRECTORS. THE OTHER DIRECTORS ARE FAMILY MEMBERS. THE APPELLANT HAS AGAIN MENTIONED THE DISPUTE WITH HER SON PENDING IN COMPANY LAW BOARD. THIS COMPANY SOLD A PROPERTY FOR RS. 14, 50,000/- OUT OF WHICH RS. L 1,50,000/- WAS RECEIVED IN BANK JUST BEFORE T HE DAY OF TRANSACTION BETWEEN THE COMPANY AND MRS. REKHA GUPTA. THE COPY OF THE SALE DEED IS ENCLOSED. OUT OF THE ABOVE AMOUNT RS. L 1,45,000/-W AS TRANSFERRED TO THE ASSESSEE. COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE LENDER COMPANY HAS BEEN ENCLOSED. 14.5 I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE, EVIDENCES ON THE RECORD AND SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT. THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER HAS ACCEPTED THE GENUINENESS OF THE FOLLOWING LOANS IN THE REMAN D REPORT - (I) RS.3,00,000/- FROM SHRI ANIL GUPTA (II) RS.5,00,000/- FROM SMT. NUPUR GUPTA SINCE, THERE ARE NO OTHER ADVERSE FACTS, THE ADDITI ONS IN RESPECT OF THE ABOVE LOANS ARE DELETED. 14.6 THE APPELLANT HAS GIVEN SUFFICIENT EVIDENCES AND CONFIRMATIONS IN 10 ITA NO. 3342/DEL/2018 RESPECT OF THE LOANS FROM M/S ANANT SHREE PVT. LTD. , SHRI BHARAT BHASIN AND M/S DIVYA SHREE PVT. LTD. THE DISCUSSION MADE ABOVE IS NOT REPEATED HERE FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY. THEREFORE, THE ADDITIONS MADE IN RESPECT OF THE LOANS FROM THE ABOVE PARTIES ARE DELETED (RELIEF RS.9,80,000 + RS.15,00,000/- + RS.1 1,45,000/-). THUS, THERE WAS CLEAR FINDING GIVEN BY THE CIT(A) T HAT IN RESPECT OF M/S DIVYA SHREE FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL SERVICES PVT. LTD., SHR I SIDDHARTH GUPTA, THE DIRECTOR OF THE LENDER COMPANY FILED MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION AND COPY OF INCOME TAX RETURN. THIS IS ONE OF THE C OMPANIES IN WHICH MRS. REKHA GUPTA IS ONE OF THE DIRECTORS. THE OTHER DIRE CTORS ARE FAMILY MEMBERS. SHE WAS HAVING DISPUTE WITH HER SON. THE DISPUTE WA S PENDING IN COMPANY LAW BOARD. THERE WAS NO BUSINESS IN THIS COMPANY SI NCE 2011. DUE TO THIS DISPUTE, REQUISITE PAPERS LIKE BALANCE SHEET ETC. W ERE NOT FILED WITH THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES AND INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT. A S REGARDS, THE SOURCE OF THE AMOUNTS RECEIVED, THE COMPANY HAD SOLD A PROPER TY OF THE COMPANY FOR RS. 12,15,000/-, OUT OF WHICH RS. 10,00,000/- WAS RECEI VED IN THE BANK BEFORE DAYS OF THE TRANSACTION WITH THE ASSESSEE. THE COPY OF THE SALE DEED IS ATTACHED. OUT OF THE SAME SUM RS.9,80,000/- WAS TRA NSFERRED TO MRS. REKHA GUPTA FOR WHICH COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT WAS PROD UCED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT(A). THESE FACTS WERE NOT DISPUTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT THE TIME OF FILING REMAND REPORT BEFORE THE CIT(A). AS REGARDS TO THE LOAN AMOUNTING TO RS. 11,45,000/- FROM M/S ANANT SHREE FINANCIAL S ERVICES PVT. LTD., THE DIRECTOR OF THIS COMPANY HAS MENTIONED ABOUT THIS L OAN TO REKHA GUPTA. MR. SIDDHARTH GUPTA, THE DIRECTOR OF THIS COMPANY FILED MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION ALONG WITH INCOME TAX RETURN. THIS I S ALSO ONE OF THE COMPANIES IN WHICH MRS. REKHA GUPTA IS ONE OF THE DIRECTORS. THE OTHER DIRECTORS ARE FAMILY MEMBERS. THE ASSESSEE HAS AGAIN MENTIONED TH E DISPUTE WITH HER SON PENDING IN COMPANY LAW BOARD. THIS COMPANY SOLD A P ROPERTY FOR RS. 14,50,000/- OUT OF WHICH RS. 11,50,000/- WAS RECEIV ED IN BANK JUST BEFORE THE DAY OF TRANSACTION BETWEEN THE COMPANY AND MRS. REK HA GUPTA. THE COPY OF 11 ITA NO. 3342/DEL/2018 THE SALE DEED WAS PRODUCED BEFORE THE CIT(A). OUT O F THE ABOVE AMOUNT RS. 11,45,000/-WAS TRANSFERRED TO THE ASSESSEE. THUS, T HESE FACTS WERE ALSO NOT DISPUTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE REMAND REP ORT. THEREFORE, THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT(A) DO NOT NEED ANY INTERFERENCE. HENCE, GROUND NO. 6 IS DISMISSED. 9. IN RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 30 TH DAY OF JULY, 2021. SD/- SD/- (R. K. PANDA) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEM BER DATED : 30/07/2021 R. NAHEED * COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI DATE OF DICTATION 05.07.2021 & 22.7.2021 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 05.07.2021 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER