ACIT, New Delhi V. Shri Vikrant Puri, New Delhi

ITA 3375/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6259 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 9 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 17-02-2016
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 29-06-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMIT MOHAN GOVIL
• Assessee Lawyers: V K AGARWAL
• Keywords: Gift; Income from undisclosed sources; Share purchase agreement; Principle of natural justice; Source of fund; Additional evidence; Question of law
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 153A; 131; 68; 132

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH H, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS. 3375 & 3376/DEL/2011 A.YRS. 2005-06 & 2006-07 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. SHRI VIKRA NT PURI, CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, NEW DELHI A-1/36, PANCHSHEEL ENCLAVE, NEW DELHI (PAN:AFYPP9110K) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY : SH. AMIT MOHAN GOVIL, CIT(DR) ASSESSEE BY : SH. V.K. AGARWAL, AR DATE OF HEARING : 17-02-2016 DATE OF ORDER : 30-03-2016 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM THE DEPARTMENT HAS FILED THESE APPEALS AGAINST TH E SEPARATE IMPUGNED ORDERS BOTH DATED 06.04.2011 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT (A) PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 & 2006-07. SINCE SOME OF T HE ISSUES INVOLVED IN BOTH THE APPEALS ARE COMMON AND IDENTICAL, HENCE, THE A PPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND NOW ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, BY DEALING WITH ITA NO. 3375/DEL/2011 (AY 2005-06). 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE APPEAL NO. 3375/DEL/2 011 (AY 2005-06) READS AS UNDER:- 1. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS NOT CORRECT IN L AW AND FACTS. 2. WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ADMITTI NG EVIDENCE UNDER RULE 46A DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS , EVEN THOUGH ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 2 THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN GIVEN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 3. WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING TH AT IN RESPECT OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S. 153A, WHERE NO INCRIMIN ATING MATERIAL HAS BEEN FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH , NO ADDITION COULD BE MADE U/S. 153A/143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX AC T, 1961. 4. WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,19,20,000/- OF UNSECURED LOANS WAS NOT SUSTA INABLE AS NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL REGARDING THESE LOANS WAS FO UND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. 5. WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF 1,19,20,000/- RECEIVED AS UNSECURED LOANS FROM VARI OUS PARTIES AS VITAL FACTS HAVE BEEN IGNORED BY THE CIT(A). 6. WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 27,02,471/- RECEIVED AS A GIFT FROM M/S INTERNATION AL WORLD WIDE AS THE IDENTITY AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE DONOR H AS NOT BEEN ANALYSED BY THE CIT(A). 7. WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 51,000/- RECEIVED AS A GIFT FROM SHRI RAJESH MOHAN, AS THE CIT(A) HAS IGNORED THE FACT THAT CASH DEPOSITS WERE MADE INTO BANK ACCOUNTS OF THE DONOR IMMEDIATELY BEFORE THE G IFT WAS MADE. 8. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER OR AMEND ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR DURING THE APPELLATE PR OCEEDINGS. 3. THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE APPEAL NO. 3376/DEL/20 11 (AY 2006-07) READS AS UNDER:- 1. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS NOT CORRECT IN L AW AND FACTS. 2. WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ADMITTI NG EVIDENCE UNDER RULE 46A DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS , EVEN THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN GIVEN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 3 3. WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING TH AT IN RESPECT OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S. 153A, WHERE NO INCRIMIN ATING MATERIAL HAS BEEN FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH , NO ADDITION COULD BE MADE U/S. 153A/143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX AC T, 1961. 4. WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE ADDITION OF RS. 5,36,00,000/- OF UNSECURED LOANS WAS NOT SUSTA INABLE AS NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL REGARDING THESE LOANS WAS FO UND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. 5. WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF 5,36,00,000/- RECEIVED AS UNSECURED LOANS FROM VARI OUS PARTIES AS VITAL FACTS HAVE BEEN IGNORED BY THE CIT(A). 6. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER OR AMEND ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR DURING THE APPELLATE PR OCEEDINGS. ITA NO. 3375/DEL/2011 (AY 2005-06) 4. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE SEARC H AND SEIZURE ACTION U/S. 132 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 WAS CARRIED OUT IN SURESH NAN DA GROUP OF CASES ON 28.2.2007. THE CASE WAS CENTRALIZED BY CIT, KOLKATA VIDE ORDER U/S. 127(2) OF THE I.T. ACT. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED RETURN OF INC OME DECLARING AN INCOME OF RS. 16,46,050/- ON 2.6.2009. NOTICE U/S. 143(2) WAS IS SUED ON 15.9.2009. NOTICE U/S. 142(1) ALONGWITH QUESTIONNAIRE WAS ISSUED ON 1 7.9.2009. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAME, ASSESSEES AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE ATT ENDED THE PROCEEDINGS AND FILED THE NECESSARY DETAILS/ CLARIFICATIONS. THE AS SESSEE HAD DECLARED INCOME FROM BUSINESS AND PROFESSION, INCOME FROM HOUSE PRO PERTY AND INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES BEING INTEREST FROM BANK ETC. THERE AFTER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER, COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT AT AN INCOME OF RS. 1,63,93,239/- PASSED VIDE ORDER DATED 29.12.2009 AN D MADE VARIOUS ADDITIONS. ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 4 5. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29.12. 2009, ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO VIDE IMPUGNED OR DER DATED 06.4.2011 HAS ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)S, REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 7. LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OF FICER AND REITERATED THE CONTENTIONS RAISED IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 7.1 ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND STATED THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS PAS SED A WELL REASONED ORDER WHICH DOES NOT NEED ANY INTERFERENCE AND THE SAME M AY BE UPHELD. 8. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE R ECORDS, ESPECIALLY THE ORDER OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 8.1 GROUND NO. 1 IS GENERAL, HENCE, NEED NOT BE AD JUDICATED. 8.2 APROPOS GROUND NO. 2 RELATING TO ADMISSION OF ADDIT IONAL EVIDENCES UNDER RULE 46A DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCE EDINGS IS CONCERNED, WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPLICATION U/R. 46 A BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO FORWARDED THE SAME TO THE AO FOR REPORT AND AO HAS SENT HIS REPORT AND COPY OF THE REPORT WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE WHO FILED H IS REJOINDER. IT IS AN ADMITTED FACT FROM THE REMAND REPORT ITSELF THAT CONFIRMATI ON CALLED FOR THE FIRST TIME ON 28.10.2009 AND THE FIRST HEARING WAS FIXED FOR 17/ 11/2009 SUBSEQUENTLY ON EVERY HEARING, THE ASSESSEE FILED CONFIRMATIONS. L AST HEARING WAS CONDUCTED ON 11.12.2009 AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED ON 2 9.12.2009, I.E., AFTER A GAP OF 18 DAYS. THE AO COULD NOT HAVE PROVIDED SOME FU RTHER TIME AS HE DID NOT PASS THE ORDER FOR A PERIOD OF MORE THAN 2 WEEKS. I T IS ALSO A FACT THAT THE AO ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 5 DID NOT REBUT THE CATEGORICAL ASSERTION OF THE ASSE SSEES COUNSEL THAT DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE AO WAS SATISFIED WITH THE EV IDENCES FILED AS HE DID NOT RAISE ANY FURTHER QUERY AND WHILE PASSING THE ASSE SSMENT ORDER, HE CHANGED HIS MIND AND MADE THE ADDITION. THE AO HAS NOWHERE MENT IONED EITHER IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OR IN THE REMAND REPORT THAT HE HA D POINTED OUT ANY DEFICIENCY IN THE DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE TO SUPPORT T HE UNSECURED LOANS. OBVIOUSLY, THE ASSESSEE CAME TO KNOW THE MIND OF TH E AO REGARDING HIS NON- SATISFACTION OF THE EVIDENCES FOR THE FIRST TIME FR OM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THEREFORE, LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY OBSERVED THAT HE IS SATISFIED THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY WAS NOT PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE AND HE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE TO FILE THE RELEVANT EVIDENCES. WE HAVE SEEN THE COPIES OF SUMMONS ISSUED TO THE LENDERS. IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT SUMMON S WERE ISSUED TO SHRI S. C. PURI, MS. SHARMILA PURI, MS. HANISHA PURI AND MS. P RIYANKA PURI. BUT THE OBSERVATION OF THE AO IS WITHOUT ANY APPLICATION OF MIND BECAUSE DURING THIS YEAR, NO CREDIT WAS RECEIVED FROM ANY OF THESE PERS ONS. WE NOTE THAT IT IS A SETTLED LAW THAT IF PRIMA FACIE INFORMATION IS NECE SSARY TO EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE, THE LD.CIT(A), SHOULD CONSIDER THE NE CESSARY EVIDENCE IN EXERCISE OF HIS POWERS U/S. 250(4) AND IT IS ALSO A SETTLED LAW THAT WHEN A STATUTORY AUTHORITY HAS THE POWER TO DO SOMETHING, THEN IT HA S A CORRESPONDING DUTY TO EXERCISE SUCH POWERS WHENEVER CIRCUMSTANCES WARRANT ING EXERCISE OF SUCH POWERS EXIST. THIS VIEW IS SUPPORTED BY THE ITAT, C ALCUTTA BENCH DECISION IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. BAJORIA FOUNDATION (254 ITR (AT ) 65). 8.3 IN THE BACKGROUND OF THE AFORESAID DISCUSSIO NS AND PRECEDENT RELIED UPON IN THE CIT(A)S ORDER, WE ARE OF THE VIEW TH AT LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 6 ADMITTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES, WHICH DOES NOT N EED ANY INTERFERENCE ON OUR PART, HENCE, WE UPHOLD THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A ) ON THIS GROUND AND DISMISS THE GROUND NO. 2 RAISED BY THE REVENUE. 9. APROPOS GROUND NO. 3 & 4 THESE GROUNDS ARE REGARDING DELETION OF ADDITIONS O N ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOANS ON THE GROUND THAT THE ADDITION CAN NOT BE MADE U/S. 153A IF NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL IS FOUND. SEARCH U/S. 132, I N THIS CASE, WAS CONDUCTED ON 29.2.2007. NEITHER ANY UNDISCLOSED INCOME / PROPE RLY NOR ANY UNDISCLOSED ACCOUNT BOOKS / DOCUMENTS WERE FOUND DURING THE SE ARCH. THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,19,20,000/- HAVE BEEN MADE IN RESPECT OF UNSECURE D LOANS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT NO DOCUMENT OR A NY OTHER EVIDENCE WAS FOUND DURING THE SEARCH RELATING TO LOANS. 9.1 IN THIS CASE ORIGINAL RETURN WAS FILED ON 22.12 .2005 WHICH WAS PROCESSED U/S. 143(1). THEREFORE, NO ASSESSMENT PRO CEEDINGS WERE PENDING ON THE DATE OF SEARCH. ON THIS ACCOUNT LD. CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITIONS BY PASSING A DETAILED AND SPEAKING ORDER ON THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE AND DEALT THESE ADDITIONS FROM PARA NO. 10, 12 TO 35 FROM PAGES 8 TO 26 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, WE ARE REPRODUCING TH E PARA NO. 10, 12 TO 35 AT PAGES 8 TO 26 OF THE LD. CIT(A)S ORDER AS UNDER:- 10. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE AO'S ORDER, THE AR'S SUB MISSIONS, THE REMAND REPORT AND THE REJOINDER BY THE AR AS WELL A S THE POSITION OF LAW AND THE FACTS OF CASE. I HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE V ARIOUS CASE LAWS RELIED UPON BY THE AR. THE JURISDICTIONAL ITAT, IN THE CAS E OF ANIL KUMAR BHATIA, HAS CONSIDERED THE VARIOUS CASES INCLUDING LMJ INTERNATIONAL LTD. VS. DC IT, ITAT (KOL) AND MEGHMANI INDUSTRIES & ORGANICS LTD., ITAT (AHD) WHICH HAVE BEEN RELIED UPON BY THE AR. T HE JURISDICTIONAL ITAT ALSO CONSIDERED THE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPRE ME COURT IN THE CASE OF PARASHURAM POTTERY WORKS CO. LTD. VS. ITO, 106 ITR 1 (SC) WHEREIN ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 7 IT WAS HELD THAT WE HAVE TO BEAR IN MIND THAT THE P OLICY OF LAW IS THAT THERE MUST BE A POINT OF FINALITY IN ALL LEGAL PROC EEDINGS, THAT SETTLED ISSUES SHOULD NOT BE REACTIVATED BEYOND A PARTICULA R STAGE AND THAT LAPSE OF TIME MUST SET AT REST JUDICIAL AND QUASI JUDICIA L CONTROVERSY AS IT MUST IN OTHER SPHERES OF HUMAN ACTIVITY. THE HON'BLE ITA T HELD THAT IN RESPECT OF AN ASSESSMENT U/S 153A, WHERE PROCESSING OF RETU RN U/S 143(1)(A) STOOD COMPLETED IN RESPECT OF RETURNS FILED IN DUE COURSE BEFORE SEARCH AND NO MATERIAL IS FOUND IN SEARCH THEREAFTER, NO A DDITION CAN BE MADE. IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT ALSO, ADDITIONS ARE NO T BASED ON ANY MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. NO INCRIMINATING DOCUMENT / EVIDENCE WAS FOUND DURING THE SEARCH IN RESPECT OF UNSECURED LOANS I GIFTS. THE UNSECURED LOANS AND GIFTS ADDED ULS 153A WERE ALREA DY DECLARED IN THE ORIGINAL RETURN FILED BEFORE THE SEARCH. THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE JURISDICTIONAL ITAT WHICH IS BINDIN G, IT IS HELD THAT NO ADDITION COULD BE MADE ULS 153A. THE GROUND IS THER EFORE ALLOWED./ 12. GROUND NO.3 - THIS GROUND IS REGARDING ADDITIO N OF RS. 1,19,20,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED LO ANS FROM VARIOUS PERSONS AS UNDER: - A). S. C. PURI 17,00,000/- B). HANISHA PURI 10,00,000/- C). PRIYANKA PURI 10,00,000/- D). SHARMILA PURI 10,00,000/- E). MIS DESIGN ONE 07,20,000/- F). MOHIT PURI 32,00,000/- ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 8 G). NEELAM MOHAN 15,00,000/- H). VARUN PURI 10,00,000/- I). ASHISH KOHI 15,00,000/- TOTAL 1,19,20,000/- 13. SINCE IT HAS ALREADY BEEN HELD THAT NO ADDITIO N COULD BE MADE ILLS 153A, THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,19,20,000/- IS HEREBY D ELETED. THOUGH THE APPEAL HAS BEEN DECIDED ON LEGAL GROUND IN FAVOUR O F THE APPELLANT, HOWEVER, TO DISPOSE OFF THE GROUND SEPARATELY, THE MERIT OF THE CASE IS ALSO BEING CONSIDERED IN THE SUBSEQUENT PARAS. 14. THE APPELLANT HAD FILED DETAILED WRITTEN SUBMI SSIONS IN RESPECT OF EACH OF THE CREDIT VIDE LETTER DATED 10/2/2011. A COPY OF THIS LETTER WAS FORWARDED TO THE AO FOR HIS COMMENTS VIDE THIS OFFI CE LETTER DATED10.02.2011. HOWEVER, NO REPLY HAS BEEN RECEIVE D TILL DATE. 15. S. C. PURI - THE AO HAS MADE THE ADDITION OF RS . 17,00,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF CREDIT IN THE NAME OF SHRI S. C. PURI ON THE GROUND THAT CONFIRMATIONS HAS NOT BEEN FILED. THE MODE OF TRANS ACTION WAS ALSO NOT CLEAR AND THEREFORE, ACCORDING TO HIM GENUINENESS O F TRANSACTION WAS IN DOUBT. HE HAS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT DETAILS OF HIS ASSETS HAVE NOT BEEN SUBMITTED AND THEREFORE, THE CREDITWORTHINESS IS NO T ESTABLISHED. THE AR ARGUED THAT SHRI S. C. PURI HAS DULY CONFIRMED THE TRANSACTION VIDE HIS LETTER DATED 8/12/2009 DIRECTLY RECEIVED IN THE OFF ICE OF THE AO IN RESPONSE TO SUMMONS ULS 131. THE APPELLANT HAS FURT HER FILED CONFIRMATIONS FROM INDIVIDUAL AS WELL HUF, PAN, IT RETURN, COPY OF CHEQUES AND BALANCE SHEET. HE HAS EMPHASIZED THAT A LL THESE DOCUMENTS ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 9 CLEARLY PROVE THE IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDITW ORTHINESS VIDE HIS 1ETTER DATED 10/2/2011, RELEVANT EXTRACT FROM WHICH AS UNDER: - '2) A) DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT, THE ADDITIO N OF RS. 17,00,000/- WAS MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT IN RESPECT O F LOANS FROM S. C. PURI ON THE GROUND THAT DETAILS OF HIS ASSETS HAVE NOT BEEN SUBMITTED. HE HAS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT SHRI S. C. PURI HAS NOT C ONFIRMED THE TRANSACTION IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT ON ENQUIRY HE CONFIRMED THE TRANSACTION AS UNDER (PAGE 10 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORD ER): - 'I HAVE TRANSACTION WITH MR. VIKRANT PURI IN THE F. Y. 2004-05 AND SAME AMOUNT STANDS IN THE F. Y. 2006-07' SHRI S. C. PURI, ALONG WITH CONFIRMATION, ALSO FILE D COPIES OF HIS IT RETURNS FOR F. Y. 2004-05, 2005-06 AND 2006-07 CLEA RLY INDICATES NAME, ADDRESS, PAN ETC. B) NOW THE ASSESSEE 'NES FILED THE FOLLOWING DOCUM ENTS ALONG WITH APPLICATION ULR 46A: - I) CONFIRMATION AS S. C. PURI (INDIVIDUAL) CLEARLY INDICATING DATE OF TRANSACTION, CHEQUE NO. AND AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION ( RS. 5,00,000/-) II) IT RETURN CLEARLY INDICATING NAME, ADDRESS AS 1 05, KOHINOOR BUILDING, PARK STREET, FLAT NO. 39, TH FLOOR, CALCU TTA - 700016 AND PAN AS AFUPP9565J. III) BALANCE SHEET CLEARLY INDICATING ADVANCE OF RS . 5,00,000/- TO SHRI VIKRANT PURI. ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 10 IV) COPIES OF CHEQUES INDICATING THAT CHEQUES WERE DRAWN ON STANDARD CHARTERED BANK, 20, COMMUNITY CENTRE, NEW FRIENDS C OLONY, NEW DELHI - 1100065 FROM SAVING BANK ACCOUNT NO. 544-1- 010587-5. V) CONFIRMATION AS S. C. PURI (KARTA OF HUF) CLEARL Y INDICATING DATE OF TRANSACTION, CHEQUE NO. AND AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION ( RS. 5,00,000/-). VI) IT RETURN CLEARLY INDICATING NAME, ADDRESS AS 1 05, KOHINOOR BUILDING, PARK STREET, FLAT NO. 39, 7 TH FLOOR, CALCUTTA - 700016 AND PAN AS AAFHS4543D. VII) BALANCE SHEET CLEARLY INDICATING ADVANCE OF R S. 5,00,000/- TO SHRI VIKRANT PURI AND THAT HUF'S BANK ACCOUNT IS WITH PU NJAB NATIONAL BANK, NEW FRIENDS COLONY, NEW DELHI - 1100065 BEARI NG SAVING BANK ACCOUNT NO. 119606. C) I) IDENTITY OF SHRI S. C. PURI IS ESTABLISHED B Y THE NAME, ADDRESS, PAN AND THE FACT THAT SUMMONS U/S 131 WERE SERVED O N HIM. PAN IS ENOUGH TO PROVE THE IDENTITY OF A PERSON AS HELD BY HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. DWARKADHISH INVESTMENT PVT. LTD., (2010) 45 DTR (DEL) 281. IT HAS ALSO BEEN HELD BY HON'BLE ITAT AGRA IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. MAYUR AGARWAL, 133 TTJ (AGR) TM 1, THAT ONCE THE SUMMONS WERE DULLY SERVED ON THE PARTIES, THEIR IDE NTITY IS PROVED. HENCE, IDENTITY OF SHRI S C PURI IS FULLY ESTABLISH ED. II) GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS IS ALSO FULLY E STABLISHED BY THE FACT THAT THE TRANSACTION IS DULY CONFIRMED BY THE CREDITOR, THE AMOUNT IS DULY REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE CREDITOR S AS ADVANCE TO THE APPELLANT AND THE FACT THAT THE AMOUNT IS RECEIVED BY ALC PAYEE CHEQUE ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 11 INDICATING CHEQUE NO, DATE, AMOUNT, SAVING BANK ACC OUNT NO. AS WELL AS NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE BANK. III) CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR IS ALSO FULL Y ESTABLISHED BY THE FACT THAT THE AMOUNT IS RECEIVED BY A/C PAYEE CHEQU E INDICATING CHEQUE NO, DATE, AMOUNT, SAVING BANK ACCOUNT NO. AS WELL A S NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE BANK. THIS VIEW IS FULLY SUPPORTED BY THE JU DGMENT OF HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. KISHORI LAL CONSTRUCTION LTD., [2010J 5 TAXMANN.COM 60 (DELHI), THE RELEVANT EXTRA CT FROM WHICH IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER: - 'AFTER CONSIDERING THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES, WE FIND OURSELVES IN FAVOUR OF THE SUBMISSION MADE BY LEARNED COUNSEL FO R THE RESPONDENT. AS MENTIONED ABOVE THE ASSESSEE HAD PRODUCED THE FOLLO WING WHICH WOULD CLEARLY DEMONSTRATE IT HAS DISCHARGED ITS INITIAL B URDEN: (A) THE IDENTITY OF YADAV AND COMPANY, BY FILING THEIR CONFIRMATION AND THEIR ASSESSMENT PARTICULARS; (B) GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION BY POINTING OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SOLD SHARES TO YADAV AND COMPANY IN TH E IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING YEAR (WHICH HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPA RTMENT) AND THAT THE PAYMENT RECEIVED DURING THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS Y EAR WAS AGAINST THE DEBT DUE FROM YADAV AND COMPANY. (C) CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR BY POINTING OU T THAT THE AMOUNT WAS RECEIVED BY WAY OF CHEQUES DRAWN ON THE BANK ACCOUN T OF YADAV AND COMPANY MAINTAINED WITH UNION BANK OF INDIA, MOTI B AGH BRANCH, NEW DELHI, WHICH, DESPITE DENIAL BY THE YADAVS, WAS, AS PER BANK RECORDS, ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 12 FOUND TO BE OPENED AND OPERATED BY SH. O.P. YADAV/ MOHINDER SINGH YADAV. THE INITIAL BURDEN THUS DISCHARGED, IT WAS FOR THE REVENUE TO ESTABLISH THAT THE TRANSACTION IN QUESTION WAS BOGUS.' IV) HON'BLE ITAT MUMBAI IN ITS LATEST JUDGMENT DAT ED 71112011 IN THE CASE OF GURUPRERNA ENTERPRISES VS. ACIT, ITA NO. 25 5,256 & 257/MUM/2010 HAS HELD ON PAGE 25, PARA 35 AS UNDER: - 'WHEN A LENDER GIVES MONEY BY WAY OF CROSSED CHEQUE S, REFLECTS THE SAME IN HIS BALANCE SHEET AND FILED THE BALANCE SHE ETS ALONGWITH THE RETURN OF INCOME WITH THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, TH E CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ABLE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF F UNDS OF THE LENDER PROPERLY, IS NOT CORRECT. ' D) THERE HAS BEEN SOME CLERICAL MISTAKE ON THE PART OF THE ACCOUNTANT OF THE APPELLANT. HE HAS MIXED UP A FEW ENTRIES OF FAM ILY MEMBERS OF SHRI S C PURI. THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE APPELLANT INDICATE S CREDIT IN THE NAME OF MS. SHARMILA PURI AT RS. 3 LACS WHO IS. WIFE OF SHRI S. C. PURI WHILE THE CONFIRMATION FROM HER INDICATES TOTAL CREDIT OF RS. 5 LACS, RS. 3 LACS VIDE CHEQUE NO. 852402 AND RS. 2 LACS VIDE CHEQUE N O. 852401. THIS CHEQUE BEARING NO. 852401 THOUGH RECEIVED FROM MS. SHARMILA PURI YET WAS WRONGLY CREDITED TO THE ACCOUNT OF SHRI S C PUR I. SIMILARLY CHEQUE NO. 095285 FOR RS. 2.5 LACS AND CHEQUE NO. 095286 F OR RS. 1 LACS DRAWN ON PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK WERE RECEIVED FROM KUSH PUR I WHO IS MINOR SON OF SHRI S. C. PURI. SINCE THE CHEQUES WERE SIGN ED BY SHRI S C PURI BEING NATURAL GUARDIAN OF KUSH PURI, THEY WERE CRED ITED TO THE ACCOUNT ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 13 OF SHRI S C PURI. AS REGARDS CREDIT IN THE ACCOUNT OF SHRI S C PURI FOR RS. 1.5 LACS, IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THIS ALC PAYEE CHEQU E BEARING NO. 734035 DATED 61412004 DRAWN ON PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, MAHAR ANI BAGH, NEW DELHI - 110065 WAS ISSUED BY SHRI S C PURI FROM HIS COMPANY MIS INTERNATIONAL BUILDING & FURNISHING CO. PVT. LTD., KOLKATA. THE ACCOUNTANT WRONGLY CREDITED THIS CHEQUE IN THE ACCO UNT OF SHRI S C PURI INSTEAD OF THE CONCERNED COMPANY. COPY OF THE CHEQU E HAS ALREADY BEEN FILED ALONGWITH THE APPLICATION U/R 46A. E) THEREFORE, IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTH INESS OF THE CREDITOR IS FULLY ESTABLISHED. THE INITIAL BURDEN ON THE ASS ESSEE THUS DISCHARGED, IT WAS FOR THE REVENUE TO ESTABLISH THAT THE TRANSACTI ON WAS BOGUS. BUT THE LD. AO HAS NOT POINTED OUT TO ANY MATERIAL TO ESTAB LISH THAT THE TRANSACTIONS ARE BOGUS. HENCE, CREDIT OF RS. 17,00, 000/- FROM SHRI S C PURI STANDS DULY EXPLAINED. ' 16. THE AO, IN HIS REMAND REPORT HAS MENTIONED THAT SHRI S. C. PURI GAVE A LOAN OF RS. 17,00,000/-- WHILE THE CONFIRMAT ION IS ONLY FOR RS. 5,00,000/-. HE HAS ALSO MENTIONED THAT NO PROOF HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO ESTABLISH THAT THE RELEVANT CHEQUES WERE CLEARED FR OM THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI S. C. PURI AND CREDITED TO THE ACCOUNT OF S HRI VIKRANT PURI. THE AR MADE HIS SUBMISSIONS ON THESE OBSERVATIONS VIDE HIS LETTER DATED 21/3/2011 AS UNDER: - '11. S. C. PURI INCLUDING S. C. PURI (HUF) - THE LD . AO SAYS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DISPUTED THE ADDITION OF RS. 17,00 ,000/- IN THE CASE OF MR. S. C. PURI. KINDLY REFER TO GROUND NO. 3 OF APP EAL WHERE THE SAME IS ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 14 CLEARLY DISPUTED BY THE APPELLANT. THE LD. AO HAS M ENTIONED THAT THE CONFIRMATION HAS BEEN FILED ONLY FOR RS. 5,00,000/- . IT SEEMS THAT HE HAS SEEN ONLY ONE CONFIRMATION WHILE THE APPELLANT HAS FILED TWO CONFIRMATIONS ONE FROM THE INDIVIDUAL AND OTHER FRO M THE HUF EACH BEING FOR RS. 5,00,000/-. AS REGARDS THE DISCREPANC Y IN THE CONFORMATIONS INDICATING LOAN OF RS. 10,00,000/- AN D ADDITIONS FOR RS. 17,00,000/- THE SAME HAS ALREADY BEEN EXPLAINED IN PARA 2(D) ON PAGE 3 OF MY EARLIER LETTER DATED 10/212011. AS REGARDS GE NUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS, THE SAME HAS BEEN EXPLAINED IN PA RA 2 ON PAGE 2 AND 3 OF MY EARLIER LETTER DATED 101212011.' 17. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE AO'S ORDER, THE AR'S SUBM ISSIONS, THE REMAND AND THE REJOINDER BY THE AR AS WELL AS THE POSITION OF LAW AND THE FACTS OF CASE. THE APPELLANT HAS FILED CONF IRMATIONS FROM INDIVIDUAL AS WELL AS HUF, PAN, IT RETURN, COPY OF CHEQUES AND BALANCE SHEET. AS REGARDS RS. 5,00,000/- RECEIVED FROM SHRI S. C. PURI, INDIVIDUAL, IT CLEARLY MENTIONS THE DATE OF TRANSAC TION, AMOUNT AND THE CHEQUE NO. ACCORDING TO THE CONFIRMATION, RS. 3,00, 000/- WERE RECEIVED VIDE CHEQUE NO. 568863 ON 3/4/2004 AND RS. 2,00,000 /-- VIDE CHEQUE NO. 568864 ON 5/4/2004. THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLA NT IN HSBC BANK IS PLACED ON PAGE 54 OF THE PAPER BOOK WHICH CLEARLY I NDICATES THAT CHEQUE NO. 568864 FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS. 2,00,000/-- HAS BEE N DULY CREDITED ON 5/4/2004. SIMILARLY, THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE APPELL ANT WITH STANDARD CHARTERED BANK PLACED AT PAGE 81 OF THE PAPER BOOK CLEARLY INDICATES THAT RS. 3,00,000/-- HAS BEEN CREDITED ON 3/4/2004 BY WAY OF INTERNAL ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 15 TRANSFER. THIS IS BECAUSE OF THE REASON THAT THE CH EQUE ISSUED BY SHRI S. C. PURI WAS ALSO DRAWN ON STANDARD CHARTERED BANK. OBVIOUSLY, WHEN THE CHEQUES WERE DRAWN BY SHRI S. C. PURI FROM HIS BANK ACCOUNT, THEY HAD TO BE CLEARED FROM THIS ACCOUNT ONLY. MOREOVER, BALANCE SHEET OF THE CREDITOR CLEARLY INDICATES ADVANCE OF RS.5,00,000/- - TO SHRI VIKRANT PURI /SHRI S. C. PURI IS BEING REGULARLY ASSESSED TO TAX , HIS PAN BEING AFUPP9565J. THE COPY OF RETURN FILED BY HIM CLEARLY MENTIONS HIS DETAILED ADDRESS. THE SUMMONS ISSUED BY THE AO ULS 131 FOR THE F. Y. 2006-07 WERE DULY SERVED UPON HIM AND HE HAS DIRECT LY REPLIED TO THE AO CONFIRMING THE TRANSACTION IN F. Y. 2004-05 WHIC H CONTINUED IN Y. 2006-07. I HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE CASE LAWS RELIE D UPON BY THE AR. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. KISHORI LAL CONSTRUCTION LTD., (2010) 5 TAXMANN.COM 60, HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT HAS HELD THAT CREDITWO RTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED BECAUSE THE AMOUNT WA S RECEIVED BY WAY OF CHEQUES DRAWN ON THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE CREDITO R THOUGH THE CREDITOR DENIED THE SAME. THE INITIAL BURDEN WAS TH US DISCHARGED, IT WAS FOR THE AO TO ESTABLISH THAT THE TRANSACTION IN QUE STION WAS BOGUS. SIMILARLY, HON'BLE ITAT MUMBAI IN ITS LATEST JUDGME NT DATED 7/1/2011 IN THE CASE OF GURUPRERNA ENTERPRISES VS. ACIT, ITA NO . 255,256 & 257/MUM/2010 HAS HELD THAT WHEN A LENDER GIVES MONE Y BY WAY OF CROSSED CHEQUES, REFLECTS THE SAME IN HIS BALANCE S HEET AND FILED THE BALANCE SHEETS ALONGWITH THE RETURN OF INCOME WITH THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ABLE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF FUNDS OF THE LENDER PROPERLY, IS NOT CORR ECT. IDENTITY OF SHRI S. ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 16 C. PURI IS ESTABLISHED BY THE NAME, ADDRESS, PAN AN D THE FACT THAT SUMMONS ULS 131 WERE SERVED ON HIM. PAN IS ENOUGH T O PROVE THE IDENTITY OF A PERSON AS HELD BY HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. DWARKADHISH INVESTMENT PVT. LTD., (2010) 45 DTR (DEL) 281. IT HAS ALSO BEEN HELD BY HON'BLE ITAT AGRA IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. MAYUR AGARWAL, 133 IT J (AGR) TM 1, THAT ONCE THE SUMMONS WERE DULLY SERVED ON THE PARTIES, THEIR IDENTITY IS PROVED. HENCE, ID ENTITY OF SHRI S C PURI IS ESTABLISHED. GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS IS ALS O INDICATED BY THE FACT THAT THE TRANSACTION IS DULY CONFIRMED BY THE CREDI TOR, THE AMOUNT IS DULY REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE CREDITORS AS ADVANCE TO THE APPELLANT AND THE FACT THAT THE AMOUNT IS RECEIVED BY ALC PAYEE CHEQUE INDICATING CHEQUE NO, DATE, AMOUNT, SAVING BANK ACC OUNT NO. AS WELL AS NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE BANK. CREDITWORTHINESS OF T HE CREDITOR IS ALSO FULLY ESTABLISHED BY THE FACT THAT THE AMOUNT IS RE CEIVED BY ALC PAYEE CHEQUE INDICATING CHEQUE NO, DATE, AMOUNT, SAVING B ANK ACCOUNT NO. AS WELL AS NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE BANK AND IN VIEW OF THE CASE LAWS DISCUSSED ABOVE. IT IS ALSO SEEN THAT BALANCE SHEET OF THE CREDITOR CLEARLY INDICATES ADVANCE OF RS.5,00,000/- TO SHRI VIKRANTP URL MOREOVER, THE AO HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD TO PROVE THAT CREDIT IS BOGUS. THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED THE PRIMARY ONUS CAST U PON HIM BY FILING VARIOUS EVIDENCES AS DISCUSSED ABOVE. THEREFORE, NO W THE ONUS GETS SHIFTED ON THE AO TO PROVE THAT CREDIT IS BOGUS WHI CH HE FAILED TO DO. SIMILAR IS THE POSITION IN REGARD TO THE CREDIT OF SHRI S. C. PURI (HUF). CONFIRMATION HAS BEEN FILED FOR A LOAN OF RS. 5,00, 0001- AND ALL OTHER ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 17 DOCUMENTS AS IN THE CASE OF THE INDIVIDUAL HAVE BEE N FILED. EVEN THE AO HAS TAKEN THEM TOGETHER. THEREFORE, AS DISCUSSED IN DETAIL, IN THE CASE OF INDIVIDUAL, CREDIT OF RS. 5,00,000/- FROM HUF IS SO FULLY EXPLAINED. THE BALANCE OF RS. 7,00,000/- HAS BEEN EXPLAINED AS HA VING BEEN RECEIVED FROM DIFFERENT FAMILY MEMBERS OF SHRI S. C. PURI LI KE RS. 2,00,000/-- FROM WIFE, MS. SHARMILA PURI, RS. 3,50,000/-- FROM MR. K USH PURI, THE MINOR SON AND RS. 1,50,000/-- FROM M/S INTERNATIONAL BUIL DING AND FURNISHING COMPANY, CALCUTTA OF WHICH SHRI S. C. PURI IS THE M D. THE FACTUAL POSITION IN RESPECT OF ALL THESE CREDITS IS SAME AS IN THE CASE OF SHRI S. C. PURI AS DISCUSSED ABOVE. ALL THE CREDITS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES AND ARE DULY CREDITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT. THEREFORE, AS DISCUSSED IN DETAIL, IN TH E CASE OF INDIVIDUAL, CREDIT OF RS. 7,00,000/- IS TO BE CONSIDERED AS EX PLAINED. 18. MS. HANISHA PURI - THE AO HAS MADE :M ADDITION OF RS. 10,00,000/- ON THE SAME GROUND AS IN THE CASE OF CREDIT FROM SH RI S. C. PURI. THE AR ALSO ARGUED ON THE SAME LINES AS IN RESPECT OF CRED IT FROM SHRI S. C. PURI. THE RELEVANT EXTRACT FROM HIS ARGUMENT IS REP RODUCED HEREUNDER: - '3) A) DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT, THE ADDITIO N OF RS. 10,00,000/- WAS MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT IN RESPECT O F LOANS FROM MS. HANISHA PURI ON THE GROUND THAT DETAILS OF HIS ASSE TS HAVE NOT BEEN SUBMITTED. HE HAS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT MS. HANISHA PURI HAS NOT CONFIRMED THE TRANSACTION IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT ON ENQUIRY SHE CONFIRMED THE TRANSACTION AS UNDER (PAGE 10 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER): - ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 18 'I HAVE TRANSACTION WITH MR. VIKRANT PURI IN THE F. Y. 2004-05 AND SAME AMOUNT STANDS IN THE F. Y. 2006-07' MS. HANISHA PURI, ALONGWITH CONFIRMATION, ALSO FILE D COPIES OF HER IT RETURNS FOR F. Y. ,2004-2005, 2005-06 AND 2006-07. B) NOW THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE FOLLOWING DOCUME NTS ALONGWITH APPLICATION ULR 46A: - I) CONFIRMATION CLEARLY INDICATING DATE OF TRANSACT ION, CHEQUE NO. AND AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION (RS. 5,00,000/-) II) IT RETURN CLEARLY INDICATING NAME, ADDRESS AS 105, KOHINOOR BUILDING, PARK STREET, FLAT NO. 39, R' FLOOR, CALCU TTA - 700016 AND PAN AS AFZPP0575K. III) COPIES OF CHEQUES INDICATING THAT HER BANK AC COUNT IS WITH PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, NEW FRIENDS COLONY, NEW DELHI - 1100065. C) I) IDENTITY OF MS. HANISHA PURL IS ESTABLISHED BY THE NAME, ADDRESS, PAN AND THE FACT THAT SUMMONS ULS 131 WERE SERVED ON HER. PAN IS ENOUGH TO PROVE THE IDENTITY OF A PERSON AS HELD BY HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. DWARKADHISH INVES TMENT PVT. LTD., (2010) 45 DTR (DEL) 281. IT HAS ALSO BEEN HELD BY H ON'BLE ITAT AGRA IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. MAYUR AGARWAL, 133 TTJ (AGR) TM 1, THAT ONCE THE SUMMONS WERE DULLY SERVED ON THE PARTIES, THEIR IDE NTITY IS PROVED. HENCE, IDENTITY OF HANISHA PURI IS FULLY ESTABLISHE D. II) GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS IS ALSO FULLY E STABLISHED BY THE FACT THAT THE TRANSACTION IS DULY CONFIRMED BY THE CREDI TOR AND THE AMOUNT IS ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 19 RECEIVED BY ALC PAYEE CHEQUES INDICATING CHEQUES NO , DATE, AMOUNT AS WELL AS NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE BANK. III) CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR IS ALSO FULLY ESTABLISHED BY THE FACT THAT THE AMOUNT IS RECEIVED BY ALC PAYEE CHEQUE IND ICATING CHEQUE NO, DATE, AMOUNT AS WELL AS NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE BAN K. THIS VIEW IS FULLY SUPPORTED BY THE JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COU RT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. KISHORI LAL CONSTRUCTION LTD., [2010] 5 TAX MANN.COM 60 (DELHI) AND HON'BLE ITAT MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF GURUPRERNA E NTERPRISES VS. ACIT, ITA NO. 255,256 & 257IMUMI2010, AS DISCUSSED ABOVE IN RESPECT OF CREDIT OF SHRI S. C. PURI. D) THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE APPELLANT INDICATES CRE DIT IN THE NAME OF MS. HANISHA PURI AT RS. 5 LACS. AS PER LEDGER ACCOUNT, CHEQUE NO. 095257 FOR RS. 3 LACS WAS RETURNED BY THE BANK AS THE SAME WAS DISHONORED. SIMILARLY CHEQUE NO. 095256 FOR RS. 2 LACS WAS RETU RNED BY THE BANK AS THE SAME WAS DISHONORED. RS. 2 LACS WERE RECEIVED V IDE CHEQUE NO. 095256 AND 3 LACS WERE RECEIVED VIDE CHEQUE NO. 095 259. THEREFORE, TOTAL AMOUNT RECEIVED WAS ONLY RS. 5 LACS WHICH WAS WRONGLY TAKEN AS RS. 10 LACS BY THE LD. AO. E) THEREFORE, IDENTITY, GEN!1INENESS AND CREDITWORT HINESS OF THE CREDITOR ARE FULLY ESTABLISHED. THE INITIAL BURDEN ON THE AS SESSEE THUS DISCHARGED, IT WAS FOR THE REVENUE TO ESTABLISH THAT THE TRANSA CTION WAS BOGUS. BUT THE LD. AO HAS NOT POINTED OUT TO ANY MATERIAL TO E STABLISH THAT THE TRANSACTIONS ARE BOGUS. HENCE, CREDIT IN THE NAME O F MS. HANISHA PURI STANDS DULY EXPLAINED. ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 20 19. THE AR FURTHER FILED HIS SUBMISSIONS ON THE RE MAND REPORT AS UNDER: - 'MS. HANISHA PURI - THE LD. AO SAYS THAT THE ASSESS EE HAS NOT DISPUTED THE ADDITION OF RS. 10,00,000/- IN THE CASE OF MS. HANISHA PURI. KINDLY REFER TO GROUND NO. 3 OF APPEAL WHERE THE SAME IS C LEARLY DISPUTED BY THE APPELLANT. MOREOVER, THE LD. AO HAS SEEN ONLY DEPOS IT SIDE OF THE BANK ACCOUNT AND NOT THE WITHDRAWAL SIDE WHERE CHEQUE NO . 095257 FOR RS. 3,00,000/-- AND CHEQUE NO. 095256 FOR RS. 2,00,0001 - FROM MS. HANISHA PURI HAVE BEEN SHOWN AS CHEQUE RETURNED (PAGE 54, 8 1, PB). THEREFORE, IF THE CHEQUES FOR RS. 5,00,000/-- WERE RETURNED BY THE BANK AND FRESH CHEQUES WERE TAKEN, THE LOAN WILL BE ONLY RS. 5,00, 000/-- AS SHOWN IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AS WELL AS BALANCE SHEET AND NOT RS. 1 0,00,000/-- AS TAKEN BY THE LD. AO. THE LD. AO HAS NOWHERE DISPUTED THE FIGURES OF BALANCE SHEET AND ENTRIES IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. IT IS ALSO M ENTIONED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT ITSELF THAT THE CHEQUE FOR RS. 3,00,000/- WAS RETURNED DUE TO SIGNATURE DIFFERENCE (PAGE 54, PB) WHICH IS NOT UNC OMMON IN BANKING TRANSACTIONS. CHEQUES NO. 095258 AND 095259 FOR RS. 2,00,000/- AND RS. 3,00,000/- RESPECTIVELY ARE 'ALSO DULY CREDITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI VIKRANT PURI (PAGE 54, PB). HENCE, CREDITWORTH INESS OF MS. HANISHA PURI IS CLEARLY PROVED BEYOND ANY SHADOW OF DOUBT WHICH HAS ALSO BEEN EXPLAINED IN PARA 3 ON PAGE NO. 4 AND 5 O F MY EARLIER LETTER DATED 10/2/2011.' 20. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE AO'S ORDER, THE AR'S SUBM ISSIONS, THE REMAND REPORT AND THE REJOINDER BY THE AR AS WELL AS THE P OSITION OF LAW AND THE ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 21 FACTS OF CASE. I HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE BANK ACCO UNTS OF SHRI VIKRANT PURL. THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE APPELLANT INDICATES CREDIT IN THE NAME OF MS. HANISHA PURI AT RS. 5 LACS. AS PER LEDGER ACCOU NT, CHEQUE NO. 095257 FOR RS. 3 LACS WAS RETURNED BY THE BANK AS T HE SAME WAS DISHONORED. SIMILARLY CHEQUE NO. 095256 FOR RS. 2 L ACS WAS RETURNED BY THE BANK AS THE SAME WAS DISHONORED. RS. 2 LACS WER E RECEIVED VIDE CHEQUE NO. 095258 AND 3 LACS WERE RECEIVED VIDE CHE QUE NO. 095259. FURTHER, I FIND FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE APPELL ANT THAT RS. 3,00,000/- - WAS CREDITED IN HIS ACCOUNT VIDE CHEQUE NO. 09525 7 ON 05/04/2004 BUT THE SAME WAS RETURNED BY THE BANK DUE TO DIFFERENCE IN SIGNATURES ON THE CHEQUE AND IS DULY DEBITED IN THE ACCOUNT ON 7/4/20 04 DUE TO NON CLEARANCE OF THE CHEQUE. SIMILARLY, CHEQUE NO. 0952 56 WAS CREDITED ON 5/4/2004 IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT WITH STANDARD CHARTERED BANK. THE SAME WAS ALSO NOT CLEARED AND HENCE WAS R ETURNED ON 6/4/2004 WHICH IS DULY DEBITED IN THE ACCOUNT. IN F ACT, LOAN OF RS. 3,00,000/-- AND RS. 2,00,000/-- WAS RECEIVED VIDE C HEQUE NO. 095259 AND 095258 WHICH ARE DULY CREDITED IN THE BANK ACCO UNT WITH HSBC BANK. THEREFORE, IT IS HELD THAT MS. HANISHA PURI H AS ADVANCED ONLY RS. 5,00,000/-- TO THE APPELLANT AND NOT RS. 10,00,.000 /--. SINCE, THE LOAN RECEIVED FROM MS. HANISHA PURI WAS RS. 5,00,000/-- ONLY AND NOT RS. 10,00,000/-, THE AO SHOULD HAVE CONSIDERED ONLY RS. 5,00,000/--. THE FACTS IN REGARD TO THIS CREDITOR ARE SAME AS IN THE CASE OF HER FATHER SHRI S. C. PURI. THEREFORE, AS DISCUSSED IN DETAIL, IN T HE CASE OF SHRI S. C. ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 22 PURI, CREDIT OF RS. 5,00,000/-- WRONGLY CONSIDERED AS RS. 10,00,000/-- BY THE AO FROM MS. HANISHA PURI IS ALSO TO BE CONSIDER ED AS EXPLAINED. 21. MS. PRIYANKA PURI - THE AO HAS MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 10,00,000/- - ON THE SAME GROUND AS IN THE CASE OF CREDIT FROM MS. HANISHA PURI. THE AR ALSO ARGUED ON THE SAME LINES AS IN RESPECT OF C REDIT FROM MS. HANISHA PURI. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS IN RESPECT OF THE AMOUNT OF CREDIT IN REGARD TO WHICH THE AR HAS ARGUED AS UNDER: - D) THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE APPELLANT INDICATES CR EDIT IN THE NAME OF MS. PRIYANKA PURI AT RS. 5 LACS. AS PER LED GER ACCOUNT, CHEQUE NO. 095275 FOR RS. 5 LACS WAS RETURNED BY TH E BANK THE SAME WAS DISHONORED. RS. 5 LACS WERE RECEIVED VIDE CHEQUE NO. 325357. THEREFORE, TOTAL AMOUNT RECEIVED WAS ONLY R S. 5 LACS WHICH WAS WRONGLY TAKEN AS RS. 10 LACS BY THE LD. A O.' 22. THE AR HAS FURTHER MADE HIS SUBMISSIONS ON THE REMAND REPORT AS UNDER: - '12. PRIYANKA PURI - THE LD. AO SAYS THAT THE ASSES SEE HAS NOT DISPUTED THE ADDITION OF RS. 10,00,000/- IN THE CASE OF MS. PRIYANKA PURI. KINDLY REFER TO GROUND NO. 3 OF APPEAL WHERE THE SAME IS C LEARLY DISPUTED BY THE APPELLANT. MOREOVER, THE LD. HAS SEEN ONLY DEPOSIT SIDE OF THE BANK ACCOUNT AND NOT THE WITHDRAWAL SIDE WHERE CHEQUE NO . 095275 FOR RS. 5,00,000/-- FROM MS. PRIYANKA PURI HAS BEEN SHOWN A S CHEQUE RETURNED (PAGE 54, PB). THEREFORE, IF THE CHEQUE FOR RS. 5,0 0,000/-- WAS RETURNED BY THE BANK AND FRESH CHEQUE WAS TAKEN, THE LOAN WI LL BE ONLY RS. 5,00,000/-- AS SHOWN IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AS WELL AS BALANCE SHEET AND ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 23 NOT RS. 10,00,000/-- AS TAKEN BY THE LD. AO. THE LD . AO HAS NOWHERE DISPUTED THE FIGURES OF BALANCE SHEET AND ENTRIES I N THE BANK ACCOUNT. CHEQUE NO. 325357 FOR RS. 5,00,000/-- IS DULY CREDI TED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI VIKRANT PURI (PAGE 55, PB). HENCE, CREDITWORTHINESS OF MS. PRIYANKA PURI IS CLEARLY PROVED BEYOND ANY SHAD OW OF DOUBT WHICH HAS ALSO BEEN EXPLAINED IN PARA 4 ON PAGE NO. 5 AND 6 OF MY EARLIER LETTER DATED 10/2/2011. 23. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE AO'S ORDER, THE AR'S SUBM ISSIONS, THE REMAND REPORT AND THE REJOINDER BY THE AR AS WELL AS THE P OSITION OF LAW AND THE FACTS OF CASE. I HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE BANK ACCO UNTS OF SHRI VIKRANT PURI. THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE APPELLANT INDICATES CREDIT IN THE NAME OF MS. PRIYANKA PURI AT RS. 5 LACS. AS PER LEDGER ACCO UNT, CHEQUE NO. 095275 FOR RS. 5 LACS WAS RETURNED BY THE BANK AS T HE SAME WAS DISHONORED. RS. 5 LACS WERE RECEIVED VIDE CHEQUE NO . 325357. FURTHER, I FIND FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT THAT RS . 5,00,000/-- WAS CREDITED IN HIS ACCOUNT-VIDE CHEQUE NO. 095275 ON 0 5/04/2004 BUT THE SAME WAS RETURNED BY THE BANK DUE TO DIFFERENCE IN SIGNATURES ON THE CHEQUE AND IS DULY DEBITED IN THE ACCOUNT ON 7/4/20 04 DUE TO NON CLEARANCE OF THE CHEQUE. IN FACT, LOAN OF RS. 5,00, 000/-- WAS RECEIVED VIDE PAY ORDER NO. 325357 WHICH IS DULY CREDITED' I N THE BANK ACCOUNT WITH HSBC BANK. THE PAYMENT WAS RECEIVED THROUGH PA Y ORDER BECAUSE OF THE PROBLEM IN SIGNATURE. THEREFORE, IT IS HELD THAT MS. PRIYANKA PURI HAS ADVANCED ONLY RS. 5,00,000/-- TO THE APPELLANT AND NOT RS. 10,00,000/-. SINCE, THE LOAN RECEIVED FROM MS. PRIY ANKA PURI WAS RS. ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 24 5,00,000/-- ONLY AND NOT RS. 10,00,000/-, THE AO SH OULD HAVE-CONSIDERED ONLY RS. 5,00,000-. THE FACTS IN REGARD TO THIS CRE DITOR ARE SAME AS IN THE CASE OF SHRI S. C. PURI. THEREFORE, AS DISCUSSED IN DETAIL, IN THE CASE OF SHRI S. C. PURI, CREDIT OF RS.5,00,000/- WRONGLY CO NSIDERED AS RS. 10,00,000/- BY THE AO FROM MS. PRIYANKA PURI IS ALS O TO BE CONSIDERED AS EXPLAINED. 24. MS. SHARMILA PURI - THE AO HAS MADE AN ADDITIO N OF RS. 10,00,000/- ON THE SAME GROUND AS IN THE CASE OF CR EDIT FROM MS. HANISHA PURI. THE AR ALSO ARGUED ON THE SAME LINES AS IN RESPECT OF CREDIT FROM MS. HANISHA PURI. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE I S IN RESPECT OF THE AMOUNT OF CREDIT IN REGARD TO WHICH THE AR HAS ARGU ED AS UNDER: - 'THERE HAS BEEN SOME CLERICAL MISTAKE ON THE PART O F THE ACCOUNTANT OF THE APPELLANT. HE HAS , MIXED UP A FEW ENTRIES OF F AMILY MEMBERS OF SHRI S C PURI. THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE APPELLANT INDICA TES CREDIT IN THE NAME OF MS. SHARMILA PURI AT RS. 3 LACS WHO IS WIFE OF S HRI S. C. PURI WHILE THE CONFIRMATION FROM HER INDICATES TOTAL CREDIT OF RS. 5 LACS, RS. 3 LACS VIDE CHEQUE NO. 852402 AND RS. 2 LACS VIDE CHEQUE N O. 852401. THIS CHEQUE BEARING NO. 852401 THOUGH RECEIVED FROM MS. SHARMILA PURI YET WAS WRONGLY CREDITED TO THE ACCOUNT OF SHRI S C PUR I. ' 25. THE AR HAS FURTHER MADE HIS SUBMISSIONS ON THE REMAND REPORT AS UNDER: - '10. SHARMILA PURI - THE LD. AO SAYS THAT THE ASSES SEE HAS NOT DISPUTED THE ADDITION OF RS. 3,00,000/- IN THE CASE OF MS. SHARMILA PURI. KINDLY REFER TO GROUND NO. 3 OF APPEAL WHERE THE SAME IS ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 25 CLEARLY DISPUTED BY THE APPELLANT. AS REGARDS DISCR EPANCY IN THE CONFORMATION INDICATING LOAN OF RS. 5,00,000/- AND ADDITIONS FOR RS. 3,00,000/-- THE SAME HAS ALREADY BEEN EXPLAINED IN PARA 5(D) ON PAGE 7 OF MY EARLIER LETTER DATED 10/2/2011. AS REGARDS GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS, THE SAME HAS BEEN EXPLAINED IN PARA 5 ON PAGE 6 AND 7 OF MY EARLIER LETTER DATED 1 0/12/2011.' 26. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE AO'S ORDER, THE AR'S SUBM ISSIONS, THE REMAND REPORT AND THE REJOINDER BY THE AR AS WELL AS THE P OSITION OF LAW AND THE FACTS OF CASE. I HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE BANK ACCO UNTS OF SHRI VIKRANT PURI. THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE APPELLANT INDICATES CREDIT IN THE NAME OF MS. SHARMILA PURI AT RS. 3 LACS WHO IS WIFE OF SHRI S. C. PURI WHILE THE CONFIRMATION FROM HER INDICATES TOTAL CREDIT OF RS. 5 LACS, RS. 3 LACS VIDE CHEQUE NO. 852402 AND RS. 2 LACS VIDE CHEQUE N O. 852401. THIS CHEQUE BEARING NO. 852401 THOUGH RECEIVED FROM MS. SHARMILA PURI YET WAS WRONGLY CREDITED TO THE ACCOUNT OF SHRI S C PUR I. THIS FIGURE OF RS. 2,00,000/- HAS ALREADY BEEN TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT-WHI LE DECIDING THE CREDIT IN THE NAME OF SHRI S. C. PURI WHEREIN THIS ADDITION HAS BEEN CONFIRMED. THEREFORE, RS. 3,00,000/-- ONLY WERE CRE DITED IN THE NAME OF MS. SHARMILA PURI. SINCE, THE LOAN RECEIVED FROM M S. SHARMILA PURI WAS RS. 3,00,000/-- ONLY AND NOT RS. 10,00,000/-, T HE AO SHOULD HAVE CONSIDERED ONLY RS. 3,00,000/--. THE FACTS IN REGAR D TO THIS CREDITOR ARE SAME AS IN THE CASE OF HER HUSBAND SHRI S. C. PURI. THEREFORE, AS DISCUSSED IN DETAIL, IN THE CASE OF SHRI S. C. PURI , CREDIT OF RS. 3,00,000/- ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 26 - WRONGLY CONSIDERED AS RS. 10,00,000/-- BY THE AO FROM MS. SHARMILA PURI IS ALSO TO BE CONSIDERED AS EXPLAINED. 27. MOHIT PURI - THE AO HAS MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 32,00,000/-- ON ACCOUNT OF CREDIT IN THE NAME OF SHRI MOHIT PURI, T HE BROTHER OF THE APPELLANT. THE ADDITION WAS MADE ON THE GROUND THAT CREDITWORTHINESS IS NOT PROVED. HE HAS ALSO MENTIONED THAT GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION IS ALSO IN DOUBT. THE AR ARGUED THAT CONFIRMATION WAS FILED DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THEREAFTER, FURTH ER DOCUMENTS LIKE COPY OF IT RETURN OF COMMUNICATION FROM AO REGARDI NG PAN AND OF BANK ACCOUNT WITH HSBC AND ALLAHABAD BANK WERE FILE D ULR 46A ESTABLISHING THE IDENTITY AND GENUINENESS AND CREDI TWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR. HE FURTHER CONTENDED THAT THE ADDITION CA NNOT BE MADE BY MA I G AN OBSERVATION THAT GENUINENESS IS UNDER DOUBT. H E VEHEMENTLY ARGUED THAT THE AO HIM ELF IS NOT SURE WHETHER THE TRANSA CTION IS IN GENUINE. ON THE BASIS OF DOUBTS, SURMISES AND CONJUNCTURES, ADD ITION CANNOT BE MADE. HE EMPHASIZED THAT FOR MAKING AN ADDITION THERE HAS TO BE A DEFINITE FINDING AND NOT MERE SUSPICION. THE RELEVANT EXTRAC T FROM HIS SUBMISSIONS IS AS UNDER: - '6) A) DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT, CONFIRMATIO NS WERE FILED FROM SHRI MOHIT PURI IN THE CAPACITY OF INDIVIDUAL AND I N THE CAPACITY OF PROPRIETOR OF MOHIT ENTERPRISES. THE LD. AO HAS MAD E THE ADDITIONS OF RS. 32,00,000/- - ON THE GROUND THAT CREDITWORTHINE SS HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED. HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT IT PARTICULAR S HAVE NOT BEEN FILED. ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 27 B) NOW THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE FOLLOWING DOCUME NTS ALONGWITH APPLICATION ULR 46A:- I) IT RETURN CLEARLY INDICATING NAME, ADDRESS AS 10 5, KOHINOOR BUILDING, PARK STREET, FLAT NO. 39, 7 TH FLOOR, CALCUTTA - 700016 AND PAN AS AFZPP0577. II) COPY OF LETTER FROM ITO, WARD 32(2) COMMUNICATI NG PAN TO SHRI MOHIT PURI AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS. III). COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT WITH HSBC BEARING ACCO UNT NO. 094- 242484-006 AND THE LOCAL ADDRESS AS A-1/36, PANCHSH EEL ENCLAVE, NEW DELHI. THIS ACCOUNT CLEARLY SHOWS THE DEBIT OF RS. 26.5 LACS ON 251512004 VIDE CHEQUE NO. 011601. IN FACT THIS IS A TRANSFER ENTRY FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI MOHIT PURI TO THE BANK ACC OUNT OF THE APPELLANT. THE OTHER BANK ACCOUNT WITH ALLAHABAD BA NK ALSO SHOWS DEBIT OF RS. 2.50 LACS VIDE CHEQUE NO. 50076 THROUGH CLEA RING. IV) BANK ACCOUNT OF MOHIT ENTERPRISES WITH HSBC BA NK BEARING ACCOUNT NO. 094-242914-001 AND THE LOCAL ADDRESS AS A-1136, PANCHSHEEL ENCLAVE, NEW DELHI. THIS ACCOUNT CLEARL Y SHOWS THE DEBIT OF RS. 3 LAC ON 261512004 VIDE CHEQUE NO.013101 THROUG H CLEARING. V) THEREFORE, BANK ACCOUNTS FOR TOTAL CREDIT OF RS . 32 LACS HAVE BEEN FILED. C) I) IDENTITY OF SHRI MOHIT PURI IS ESTABLISHED BY THE NAME, ADDRESS, PAN AND THE FACT THAT COMMUNICATION FROM THE ITO WA S SERVED ON HIM. PAN IS ENOUGH TO PROVE THE IDENTITY OF A PERSON AS HELD BY HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. DWARKADHISH INVES TMENT PVT. LTD., ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 28 (2010) 45 DTR (DEL) 281. IT HAS ALSO BEEN HELD BY H ON'BLE ITAT AGRA IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. MAYUR AGARWAL, 133 TTJ (AGR) TM 1, THAT ONCE THE SUMMONS WERE DULLY SERVED ON THE PARTIES, THEIR IDE NTITY IS PROVED. HENCE, IDENTITY OF SHRI MOHIT PURI IS FULLY ESTABLI SHED. II) GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS IS ALSO FULLY E STABLISHED BY THE FACT THAT THE TRANSACTION IS DULY CONFIRMED BY THE CREDI TOR AND THE AMOUNT IS RECEIVED BY ALC PAYEE CHEQUES WHICH ARE DULY DEBITE D IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI MOHIT PURI AND HE HAS CONFIRMED THE SAME. III) CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR IS ALSO FULLY ESTABLISHED BY THE FACT THAT THE AMOUNT IS DULY DEBITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT S OF SHRI MOHIT PURI. THIS VIEW IS FULLY SUPPORTED BY THE JUDGMENT OF HON 'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. KISHORI LAL CONSTRUCTI ON LTD., [2010J 5 TAXMANN.COM 60 (DELHI) AND HON'BLE ITA T MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF GURUPRERNA ENTERPRISES VS. ACIT, ITA NO. 255,256 & 257/MUM/2010 AS DISCUSSED ABOVE IN THE CASE OF CREDIT FROM SHRI S. C. PURI. IV) THE LD. AO HAS MENTIONED ON PAGE 14 (PARA 10.1) OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION IS ALSO I N DOUBT. THE ADDITIONS CANNOT BE BASED ON DOUBTS AND HAVE TO BE BASED ON F INDINGS RELYING ON EVIDENCES TO THAT EFFECT. THIS VIEW IS FURTHER CONF IRMED BY THE HON'BLE ITAT MUMBAI'S LATEST JUDGMENT DATED 7/11/2011 IN TH E CASE OF GURUPRERNA ENTERPRISES VS. ACIT, ITA NO. 255,256 & 2571/MUM/2010, PAGE 26, PARA 36, THE RELEVANT EXTRACT FROM WHICH I S AS UNDER: - 'THE ADDITION CANNOT BE MADE BY MAKING AN OBSERVATI ON THAT THE LOANS DO NOT APPEAR TO BE GENUINE' ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 29 D) THEREFORE, IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTH INESS OF THE CREDITOR IS FULLY ESTABLISHED. THE INITIAL BURDEN ON THE ASS ESSEE THUS DISCHARGED, IT WAS FOR THE REVENUE TO ESTABLISH THAT THE TRANSACTI ON WAS BOGUS. BUT THE LD. AO HAS NOT POINTED OUT TO ANY MATERIAL TO ESTAB LISH THAT THE TRANSACTIONS ARE BOGUS. HENCE, CREDIT OF RS. 32,00, 000/- FROM SHRI MOHIT PURI STANDS DULY EXPLAINED. ' 28. THE AR HAS FURTHER MADE HIS SUBMISSIONS ON THE REMAND REPORT AS UNDER: - '8. A) SHRI MOHIT PURI - THE LD. AO HAS STATED THAT THERE IS A CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 7,50,000/- IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SH RI MOHIT PURI WHO HAS GIVEN A LOAN OF RS. 32,00,000/- IN THIS CONNECTION IT IS SUBMITTED THAT IT IS CLEARLY EVIDENCED FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT THAT BEFORE GIVING LOAN OF RS. 26,50,000/- ON 25/5/2004, CASH OF ONLY RS. 40,000/- WAS DEPOSITED ON 5/5/2004, I.E., 20 DAYS BACK. THE BALANCE AFTER GIV ING LOAN TO THE APPELLANT WAS RS. 1,24,130/- IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE CREDITOR WHICH IS MORE THAN RS. 40,0001- DEPOSITED IN CASH. THEREFORE , CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 40,000/- IS IMMATERIAL AS FAR AS LOAN OF RS. 26,50, 000/- IS CONCERNED. LOAN OF RS. 3,00,000/- LACS WAS GIVEN ON 26/5/2004 OUT OF OPENING BALANCE OF RS. 4,02,000/-- AND STILL THERE WAS BALA NCE OF RS. 1,02,000/-- AFTER GIVING THE LOAN. AS REGARDS LOAN OF RS. 2,5 0,000/-, THERE ARE SOME CASH AS WELL AS CREDIT ENTRIES IN THE BANK ACCOUNT BUT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT LIABLE TO EXPLAIN SOURCE OF SOURCE. WHAT IS MEANT B Y THE CREDITWORTHINESS IS THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS IN THE HANDS OF THE CR EDITOR. THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS IS CLEARLY EVIDENCED FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT ITSELF. SOURCE OF ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 30 FUNDS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE CREDITOR CAN ONLY BE QUESTIONED IN THE HANDS OF THE CREDITORS BECAUSE IN THE CASE OF APPEL LANT SOURCE OF SOURCE CANNOT BE QUESTIONED. THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN DISCUSSED IN DETAIL IN PARA (B) (V), (VI) AND (VII) ON PAGE 9 AND 10 AS WELL AS PAR A (B) ON PAGE 12 AND 13 OF EARLIER SUBMISSIONS DATED 1012/2011. FOR THE SAK E OF BREVITY, THEY ARE NOT REPEATED HERE. IN ANY CASE, IT IS ONLY AN AMOUN T OF RS. 2,00,000/- WHICH IS INVOLVED W.R.T. CASH DEPOSIT. B) THE LD. AO FURTHER SAYS THAT DETAILS OF TRANSFER ENTRIES FOR TRANSACTION OF MONEY FROM BANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI MOHIT PURI TO SH RI VIKRANT PURI ARE NOT GIVEN AND THEREFORE, CREDITWORTHINESS IS NOT PR OVED. IN FACT, THERE IS ONLY ONE TRANSFER ENTRY OF RS. 26,50,000/- WHERE TH E BANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI MOHIT PURI ITSELF RECORDS TRANSFER OF AMOUNT TO ACC OUNT NO. 094-242476- 006 OF SHRI VIKRANT PURI. THERE CANNOT BE ANY BETTE R EVIDENCE FOR TRANSFER ENTRY THAN THE RECORDS OF THE BANK ITSELF. AS REGARDS OTHER LOANS, CHEQUES WERE ISSUED WHICH ARE DULY DEBITED IN THE B ANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI MOHIT PURI AND CREDITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI VIKRANT PURI CLEARLY GIVING EVEN THE CHEQUE NOS. THEREFORE, CREDITWORTHI NESS OF SHRI MOHIT PURI IS PROVED BEYOND ANY SHADOW OF DOUBT. KINDLY A LSO REFER TO PARA (C) ON PAGE 8 OF MY EARLIER SUBMISSIONS DATED 10/2/2011 IN THIS REGARD. 29. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE AO'S ORDER, THE AR'S SUBM ISSIONS, THE REMAND REPORT AND THE REJOINDER BY THE AR AS WELL AS THE P OSITION OF LAW AND THE FACTS OF CASE. I HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE EXPLANATI ON REGARDING THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF SHRI MOHIT PURI, THE CREDITOR. AS REGAR DS IDENTITY OF SHRI MOHIT PURI, THE SAME IS ESTABLISHED BY THE NAME, AD DRESS, PAN AND THE ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 31 FACT THAT COMMUNICATION FROM THE AO WAS SERVED ON H IM AS DISCUSSED IN RESPECT OF CREDIT FROM SHRI S. C. PURI THE AO HAS S TATED IN THE REMAND REPORT THAT GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION IS IN DOUBT. HE HAS NOT GIVEN ANY REASONS FOR THE DOUBTS IN HIS MIND. THE ADDITIONS C ANNOT BE BASED ON DOUBTS AND HAVE TO BE BASED ON DEFINITE FINDINGS RE LYING ON EVIDENCES TO THAT EFFECT. I AGREE WITH THE AR THAT ADDITION CANN OT BE MADE ON THE BASIS OF DOUBTS, SUSPICIONS, SURMISES AND CONJECTURES. HO N'BLE ITAT MUMBAI HAS CLEARLY UPHELD THIS RATIO IN THE CASE OF GURUPR ERNA ENTERPRISES. MOREOVER, GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION IS ALSO ES TABLISHED BY THE FACT THAT THE TRANSACTION IS DULY CONFIRMED BY THE CREDI TOR AND THE AMOUNT IS RECEIVED BY ALC PAYEE CHEQUES WHICH ARE DULY DEBITE D IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI MOHIT PURI AND HE HAS CONFIRMED THE SAME. THEREFORE, IT IS HELD THAT GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION IS TO BE CO NSIDERED AS ESTABLISHED. AS REGARDS CREDITWORTHINESS, FROM THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF SHRI MOHIT PURI WITH HSBC BANK, BEARING ALC NO. 094-2424 84-006, IT IS OBSERVED THAT BEFORE GIVING LOAN OF RS. 26,50,000/- ON 25/5/2004, CASH OF ONLY RS. 40,000/- WAS DEPOSITED ON 5/5/2004, I.E. 20 DAYS BACK. THE BALANCE AFTER GIVING LOAN TO THE APPELLANT WAS RS. 1,24,130/-- IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE CREDITOR WHICH IS MORE THAN RS. 40,0 00/-- DEPOSITED IN CASH. THEREFORE, CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 40,000/-- IS I MMATERIAL AS FAR AS LOAN OF RS. 26,50,000/-- IS CONCERNED. AS REGARDS L OAN OF RS. 3,00,000/-- FROM HSBC ALC NO. 094-242914-001, IT IS OBSERVED TH AT THIS LOAN OF RS. 3,00,000/- WAS GIVEN ON 26/5/2004 OUT OF OPENING BA LANCE OF RS. 4,02,000/- AND STILL THERE WAS BALANCE OF RS. 1,02, 000/-- AFTER GIVING THE ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 32 LOAN. AS REGARDS LOAN OF RS. 50,000/- FROM ALLAHABA D BANK BEARING ALC NO. 710933, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THERE ARE SOME CASH AS WELL AS CREDIT ENTRIES IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. BEFORE ISSUING CHEQUE OF RS. 2,50,000/--, RS. 50,000/-- WAS CREDITED BY CLEARING WHILE RS. 2,00,0 00/- WAS DEPOSITED IN CASH. HOWEVER, THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE FUNDS WERE AVAILABLE WITH THE CREDITOR. I HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE CASE LAWS LIKE CIT VS. TAJ BOREWELLS, (2007) 291 ITR 232 (MAD), CIT VS. DIAMOND PRODUCTS LTD., (2009) 21 DTR (DEL) 9, JAIKISHAN DADLANI VS. ITO, (2005) 4 SO T 138 (MUM) AND TOLARAM DAGA VS. CIT, (1966) 59 ITR 632 (ASSAM) WHE REIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT SOURCE OF SOURCE CANNOT BE EXAMINED BY TH E AO. IF THE AO HAS ANY DOUBT ABOUT THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT (RS. 2,0 0,000/--) IN THE ACCOUNT OF THE CREDITOR, IT CAN BE CONSIDERED IN TH E HANDS OF THE CREDITOR ONLY AND NOT IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT. THE AO HAS MENTIONED IN THE REMAND REPORT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED T HE DATE AND DETAILS OF THE CORRESPONDING ENTRIES FOR TRANSFER OF MONEY FRO M THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI MOHIT PURI TO THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI VIKRANT PURI. THUS, HE OBSERVED THAT THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF SHRI MOHIT PU RI IS NOT ESTABLISHED. IN THIS RESPECT IT IS OBSERVED THAT IN FACT, THERE IS ONLY ONE TRANSFER ENTRY OF RS. 26,50,000/- WHERE THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI M OHIT PURI ITSELF RECORDS TRANSFER OF AMOUNT T TO ACCOUNT NO. 094-24 2476-006 OF SHRI VIKRANT PURI. THERE CANNOT BE ANY BETTER EVIDENCE F OR TRANSFER ENTRY THAN THE RECORDS OF THE BANK ITSELF. AS REGARDS OTHER LO ANS, CHEQUES WERE ISSUED WHICH ARE DULY DEBITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT O F SHRI MOHIT PURI AND CREDITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI VIKRANT PU RI GIVING THE CHEQUE ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 33 NOS. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HELD THAT CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR IS FAIRLY ESTABLISHED IN RESPECT OF ENTRIES OF RS. 26,50,000/ --, RS. 3,00,000/-- AND RS. 2,50,000/--. HENCE, THE CREDIT OF RS. 32,00,000 1-, WOULD STANDS DULY EXPLAINED. 30. VARUN PURI - THE AO HAS MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 10,00,000/-- IN RESPECT OF CREDIT FROM SHRI VARUN PURI ON THE GROUN D THAT CREDITWORTHINESS IS NOT PROVED BECAUSE THERE IS A C ASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 10,00,000/- THREE DAYS PRIOR TO ADVANCING THE LOAN. HE HAS ALSO MENTIONED THAT THE GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION IS IN DOUBT. THE AR ARGUED THAT CONFIRMATION, PAN, CHEQUE NO., ADDRESS, BANK ACCOUNT ETC. OF THE CREDITOR HAVE BEEN FILED DURING THE COURSE O F ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ESTABLISHING IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR. RELEVANT EXTRACT FROM HIS WRITTEN SUB MISSIONS ARE AS UNDER: '7) A) DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IN RESPECT OF CREDIT OF RS. 10,00,000/- FROM SHRI VARUN PURI, THE APPELL ANT FILED CONFIRMATION, PAN, IT RETURN AND BANK STATEMENT BEF ORE THE AO. HOWEVER HE MADE THE ADDITION ON THE GROUND THAT CRE DIT WORTHINESS IS NOT PROVED. IN THIS CONNECTION FOLLOWING IS SUBMITT ED: - I) CONFIRMATION FILED CLEARLY INDICATES THE DATE OF TRANSACTION, PAN, CHEQUE NO. AND AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION (RS. 10,00,000 /-) II) IT RETURN CLEARLY INDICATES NAME, ADDRESS AS 1 05, KOHINOOR BUILDING, PARK STREET, FLAT NO. 39, 7 TH FLOOR, CALCUTTA - 700016 AND PAN AS AHPPP1216K. ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 34 III) COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT WITH STANDARD CHARTERED BANK, GREATER KAILASH, NEW DELHI, BEARING ACCOUNT NO. 521-1-01244 8-7 AND THE LOCAL ADDRESS AS B-64, GREATER KAI/ASH-I, NEW DELHI - 110 048 WAS FILED. THIS ACCOUNT CLEARLY SHOWS THE DEBIT OF RS. 10 LACS ON 2 41512004 VIDE CHEQUE NO. 480582 THROUGH CLEARING. B) I) IDENTITY OF SHRI VARUN PURI IS ESTABLISHED B Y THE NAME, ADDRESS, PAN AND CONFIRMATION. PAN IS ENOUGH TO PRO VE THE IDENTITY OF A PERSON AS HELD BY HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE C ASE OF CIT VS. DWARKADHISH INVESTMENT PVT. LTD., (2010) 45 DTR (DE L) 281. II) GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS IS ALSO FULLY E STABLISHED BY THE FACT THAT THE TRANSACTION IS DULY CONFIRMED BY THE CREDI TOR AND THE AMOUNT IS RECEIVED BY ALC PAYEE CHEQUE WHICH IS DULY DEBITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI VARUN PURI AND HE HAS CONFIRMED THE SAME. III) CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR IS ALSO FULLY ESTABLISHED BY THE FACT THAT THE AMOUNT IS DULY DEBITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI VARUN PURI. THIS VIEW IS FULLY SUPPORTED BY THE JUDGMENT OF HON 'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. KISHORI LAL CONSTRUCTI ON LTD., [2010J 5 TAXMANN.COM 60 (DELHI) AND HON'BLE ITAT MUMBAI IN T HE CASE OF GURUPRERNA ENTERPRISES VS. ACIT, ITA NO. 255,256 & 2571MUM12010, AS DISCUSSED ABOVE IN THE CASE OF CREDIT FROM SHRI S. C. PURI. IV) THE LD. AO HAS MENTIONED ON PAGE 15, PARA 12.1 THAT THE GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION IS IN SERIOUS DOUBT. THE ADDITIONS CANNOT BE BASED ON DOUBTS AND HAVE TO BE BASED ON FINDINGS RE LYING ON EVIDENCES TO THAT EFFECT. THIS VIEW IS FURTHER CONFIRMED BY T HE HON'BLE ITAT ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 35 MUMBAI'S LATEST JUDGMENT DATED 7/1/2011 IN THE CASE OF GURUPRERNA ENTERPRISES VS. ACIT, ITA NO. 255,256 & 2571MUM1201 0, PAGE 26, PARA 36, THE RELEVANT EXTRACT FROM WHICH IS AS UNDE R: - 'THE ADDITION CANNOT BE MADE BY MAKING AN OBSERVATI ON THAT THE LOANS ` DO NOT APPEAR TO BE GENUINE' V) THE LD. AO HAS ALSO OBSERVED THAT IN THE BANK AC COUNT OF SHRI VARUN PURI THERE IS A CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 10 LACS THREE D AYS PRIOR TO ADVANCING THE LOEN. IN THIS REGARD IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE A PPELLANT DOES NOT HAVE ANY MECHANISM TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF SOURCE. THE APPELLANT HAS FULLY ESTABLISHED THAT THE AMOUNT WAS RECEIVED FROM SHRI VARUN PURI WHO HAS ALSO OWNED UP THE TRANSACTION BY FILING CONFIRMATIO N. THEREFORE, THE PRIMARY ONUS CAST ON THE APPELLANT IS DISCHARGED. I N THIS CONNECTION RELIANCE IS PLACED ON THE JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE MP HI GH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. METACHEM INDUSTRIES, 245 ITR 160, RELEVA NT EXTRACT FROM WHICH IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER: - '4.ONCE IT IS ESTABLISHED THAT THE AMOUNT H AS BEEN INVESTED BY A PARTICULAR PERSON, BE HE A PARTNER OR AN INDIVIDUAL, THEN THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ASSESSEE-FIRM IS OVE R. THE ASSESSEE- FIRM CANNOT ASK THAT PERSON WHO MAKES INVESTMENT WH ETHER THE MONEY INVESTED IS PROPERLY TAXED OR NOT. THE ASSESS EE IS ONLY TO EXPLAIN THAT THIS INVESTMENT HAS BEEN MADE BY THE P ARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL AND IT IS RESPONSIBILITY OF THAT INDIVID UAL TO ACCOUNT FOR THE INVESTMENT MADE BY HIM. IF THAT PERSON OWNS THA T ENTRY, THEN, THE BURDEN OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM IS DISCHARGED. IT I S OPEN FOR THE ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 36 AO TO UNDERTAKE FURTHER INVESTIGATION WITH REGARD T O THAT INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS DEPOSITED THIS AMOUNT.' VI) SIMILARLY HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT, IN THE CASE OF ORIENT TRADING CO. LTD. VS. CIT, (1963) 49 ITR 723 (BOM), HAS HELD AS UNDER: - 'CASH CREDIT-BURDEN OF PROOF-WHEN THE ENTRY STANDS IN THE NAME OF A THIRD PARTY AND THE ASSESSEE ESTABLISHES THE I DENTITY OF THE CREDITOR AND PRODUCES EVIDENCE SHOWING THAT THE ENT RY IS NOT FICTITIOUS, INITIAL BURDEN LYING ON THE ASSESSEE ST ANDS DISCHARGED; THE BURDEN SHIFTS ON TO THE REVENUE TO SHOW THAT TH E ENTRY REPRESENTED ASSESSEE'S SUPPRESSED INCOME-CASH CREDI T, IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, COULD NOT BE T REATED AS ASSESSEE'S UNDISCLOSED INCOME' VII) THE LD. AO HAS FURTHER HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ROUTED HIS UNACCOUNTED INCOME THROUGH THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI VARUN PURI. THE OBSERVATION IS PURELY BASED ON SURMISES A ND CONJECTURES AS HE HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY MATERIAL ON R ECORD TO ESTABLISH THAT IT IS THE ASSESSEE'S MONEY WHICH WAS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI VARUN PURI. THE ONUS IS ON THE REVENUE TO ESTABLISH THE SAME. RELIANCE IS PLACED ON THE FO LLOWING CASE LAWS, THE RELEVANT EXTRACTS FROM WHICH ARE REPRODUC ED HEREUNDER FOR READY REFERENCE: -: - ITO VS. SMT. BIBI RANI BANSAL, (2010) 133 TTJ (AGRA ) (TM) 394, ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 37 'ASSESSEE HAVING SUBMITTED COPIES OF CONTRACT NOTES , BILLS, SHARE CERTIFICATES ALONG WITH DETAILS OF DEMAND DRAFT ISS UED FROM THE ACCOUNT OF THE BROKER TO SUBSTANTIATE THE SALE OF S HARES MADE BY HER, AND THE AO HAVING FAILED TO ESTABLISH THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD INTRODUCED HER OWN UNACCOUNTED MONEY IN THE SHAPE O F SALE PROCEEDS OF SHARES, THE TRANSACTION OF SALE OF SHAR ES CANNOT BE TREATED AS NON-GENUINE' ARAVALI TRADING CO. VS. I TO, (2008) 220 CTR (RAI) 622 'ONCE THE EXISTENCE OF THE CREDITORS IS PROVED AND SUCH PERSONS OWN THE CREDITS WHICH ARE FOUND IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE'S ONUS STANDS DISCHARGED AND THE LATTER IS NOT FURTHER REQUIRED TO PROVE THE SOURCE FROM WHICH THE CREDITO RS COULD HAVE ACQUIRED THE MONEY DEPOSITED WITH HIM AND, THEREFOR E, ADDITION UNDER S. 68 CANNOT BE SUSTAINED IN THE ABSENCE OF A NYTHING TO ESTABLISH THAT THE SOURCES OF THE CREDITORS' DEPOSI TS FLEW FROM THE ASSESSEE ITSELF. ' CIT VS. VALUE CAPITAL SERVICES (P) LTD., (2008) 307 ITR 334 (DEL) 'INCOME-CASH CREDIT-SHARE APPLICATION MONEY-CIT(A) ACCEPTED THE EXISTENCE OF THE APPLICANTS-IT IS VERY DIFFICUL T FOR THE ASSESSEE TO SHOW THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF STRANGERS-REVENUE H AS NOT SHOWN THAT THE APPLICANTS DID NOT HAVE THE MEANS TO MAKE THE INVESTMENT AND THAT SUCH INVESTMENT ACTUALLY EMANATED FROM THE COFFERS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY-ADDITION RIGHTLY DELETED BY TH E TRIBUNAL-NO SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW ARISES. ' ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 38 C) THEREFORE, IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTH INESS OF THE CREDITOR IS FULLY ESTABLISHED. THE INITIAL BURDEN ON THE ASS ESSEE THUS DISCHARGED, IT WAS FOR THE REVENUE TO ESTABLISH THAT THE TRANSACTI ON WAS BOGUS. BUT THE LD. AO HAS NOT POINTED OUT TO ANY MATERIAL TO ESTAB LISH THAT THE TRANSACTIONS ARE BOGUS. HENCE, CREDIT OF RS. 10,00, 000/- FROM SHRI VARUN PURI STANDS DULY EXPLAINED. ' 31. THE AR FURTHER ARGUED THAT BY NOW IT IS JUDICIA LLY SETTLED THAT THE APPELLANT CANNOT BE ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF SOURCE. IT IS ALSO JUDICIALLY SETTLED THAT IF THE REVENUE HAS ANY DOUB T ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE SOURCE OF FUNDS IN THE HANDS OF THE CREDITOR S, ADDITION COULD HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE HANDS OF CREDITORS AND NOT THE ASS ESSEE. FOR THIS HE RELIED ON VARIOUS CASE LAWS AS UNDER: - CIT VS. DIAMOND PRODUCTS UA.. (2009) 21 DTR (DEL) 9 'AO IS NOT PERMITTED TO EXAMINE THE SOURCE OF THE S OURCE ONCE THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO ESTABLISH THAT THE TRANSACTION WITH HIS CREDITOR IS GENUINE AND THE IDENTITY AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF TH E CREDITOR HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED. ' CIT VS. TAJ BOREWELLS, (2007) 291 ITR 232 (MAD) 'INCOME-CASH CREDIT-GENUINENESS-ASSESSEE FIRM DID N OT MAINTAIN ANY BOOKS OF ACCOUNT-IT HAS SHOWN THE CAPITAL CONTRIBUT IONS OF THE PARTNERS IN THE P&L ALC AND BALANCE SHEET-P&L ALC AND BALANC E SHEET ARE NOT BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS CONTEMPLATED UNDER THE PROVISIO NS OF THE ACT- FURTHER, EXPLANATION OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE FIRM H AS NOT BEEN REJECTED BY THE AO-AO CANNOT ASK THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE S OURCE OF A SOURCE-IF ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 39 THE AO DOUBTED THE GENUINENESS OF THE SOURCE OF THE PARTNERS, HE COULD HAVE MADE ADDITIONS IN THE HANDS OF THE PARTNERS ON LY AND NOT IN THE HANDS OF THE FIRM- ADDITION UNDER S. 68 WAS NOT THE REFORE SUSTAINABLE' JAIKISHAN DADLANI VS. ITA, (2005) 4 SOT 138 (MUM) 'INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES-CASH CREDIT-GENUIN ENESS-WHILE EXAMINING APPLICABILITY OF S. 68, SOURCE OF SOURCE CANNOT BE INVESTIGATED-FACTUM OF BORROWING AND IDENTITY OF CR EDITOR NOT BEING IN DOUBT, NO ADDITION COULD BE MADE UNDER S. 68' TOLARAM DAGA VS. CIT, (1966) 591TR 632 (ASSAM) 'INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES-BURDEN OF PROOF-CA SH CREDIT FOUND IN THE BOOKS OF FIRM IN WHICH ASSESSEE IS A PARTNER IN THE NAME OF ASSESSEE'S WIFE-WIFE, CLAIMING THE MONEY AS BELONGING TO HER A ND AS HAVING BEEN DEPOSITED BY HER-GENUINENESS AND REGULARITY OF THE ACCOUNTS NOT CHALLENGED-U/S. 34, EVIDENCE ACT, THE ACCOUNTS ARE PRIMA FACIE PROOF OF CORRECTNESS OF ENTRY AND THE ENTRY IS PRIMA FACIE P ROOF OF DEPOSIT OF MONEY BY THE PERSON IN WHOSE NAME IT STANDS-ASSESSE E CANNOT BE ATTRIBUTED THE KNOWLEDGE OF SOURCE OF THE AMOUNT UN DER SECTION 106 OF EVIDENCE ACT MERELY BECAUSE HE HAPPENS TO BE THE HU SBAND OF THE DEPOSITOR-BURDEN OF PROOF ABOUT SOURCE OF THE AMOUN T OF DEPOSIT CANNOT BE PLACED ON THE FIRM OR THE PARTNERS-AMOUNT COULD NOT BE TREATED AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF ASSESSEE. ' 32. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE AO'S ORDER, THE AR'S SUBM ISSIONS, THE REMAND REPORT AND THE REJOINDER BY THE AR AS WELL AS THE P OSITION OF LAW AND THE FACTS OF CASE. I HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE BANK ACCO UNTS OF SHRI VARUN ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 40 PURI, THE CREDITOR. IDENTITY OF THE CREDITOR IS EST ABLISHED AS DISCUSSED IN DETAIL IN THE CASE OF SHRI S. C. PURI. GENUINENESS IS ALSO ESTABLISHED AS DISCUSSED IN DETAIL IN THE CASE OF SHRI MOHIT PURI. AS REGARDS CREDITWORTHINESS, THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE FUNDS W ERE AVAILABLE WITH THE CREDITOR. I HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE CASE LAWS LIKE CIT VS. TAJ BOREWELLS, (2007) 291 ITR 232 (MAD),CIT VS. DIAMOND PRODUCTS L TD., (2009) 21 DTR (DEL) 9, JAIKISHAN DADLANI V ITO, (2005) 4 SOT 138 (MUM) AND TOLARAM DAGA VS. CIT, (1966) 59 ITR 632 (ASSAM)WHER EIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT SOURCE OF SOURCE CANNOT BE EXAMINED BY TH E AO. IF THE AO HAS ANY DOUBT ABOUT THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT IN THE A CCOUNT OF THE CREDITOR, IT CAN BE CONSIDERED IN THE HANDS OF THE CREDITOR O NLY AND NOT IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT. I HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE MP HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. METACHEM INDUS TRIES, 245 ITR 160 WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT ONCE IT IS ESTABLISHE D THAT THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN INVESTED BY A PARTICULAR PERSON, THEN THE RESP ONSIBILITY OF THE ASSESSEE-FIRM IS OVER. THE ASSESSEE-FIRM CANNOT ASK THAT PERSON WHO MAKES INVESTMENT WHETHER THE MONEY INVESTED IS PROP ERLY TAXED OR NOT. IF THAT PERSON OWNS THAT ENTRY, THEN, THE BURDEN OF TH E ASSESSEE FIRM IS DISCHARGED. ACCORDINGLY, IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLA NT ALSO, PRIMARY ONUS HAS BEEN DISCHARGED BY THE APPELLANT AND NOW THE ON US GETS SHIFTED ON THE AO TO PROVE THAT CREDIT IS BOGUS WHICH HE FAILE D TO DO. THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE LEGAL POSITION AS DISCUSSED ABOVE, THE CREDIT OF RS. 10,00,000/- IS TO BE CONSIDERED AS EXPLAINED. ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 41 33. NEELAM MOHAN - THE AO HAS MADE AN ADDITION OF R S. 15,00,000/- IN RESPECT OF CREDIT FROM MS. NEELAM MOHAN. THE AR HAS STATED THAT NO CREDIT WAS RECEIVED FROM MS. NEELAM MOHAN DURING TH E YEAR. SINCE, THE AO HAS NOT DISPUTED THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT INSP ITE OF THE FACT THAT A COPY OF THE SUBMISSIONS WERE FORWARDED TO HIM FOR H IS COMMENTS, THE ADDITION IS TREATED AS NULL AND VOID. 34. SHRI ASHISH KOHLI AND MIS DESIGN ONE - THE AO H AS ALSO ADDED RS. 15,00,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED CREDI T IN THE NAME OF SHRI ASHISH KOHLI AND RS.7,20,000/- IN THE NAME OF MIS D ESIGN ONE OF WHICH SHRI ASHISH KOHLI IS THE PROPRIETOR. THE AR HAS ARG UED AS UNDER: - 'THE ADDRESS OF SHRI ASHISH KOHLI IS AS UNDER: - SHRI ASHISH KOHLI PROPRIETOR M/S DESIGN ONE, R/O KOTHI NO. 894, SECTION 17B, HUDA GURGAON, HARYANA COPY OF PAY-IN SLIP HAS BEEN FILED U/R 46A WHICH IN DICATES THAT AMOUNT OF RS. 7,20,000/-- WAS RECEIVED FROM M/S DESIGN ONE VIDE CHEQUE NO. 020201 DRAWN ON HSBC BANK, DLF-I, MEHRAULI GURGAON ROAD, DELHI. SIMILARLY ANOTHER COPY OF PAY-IN SLIP HAS ALSO BEEN FILED U/R 46A WHICH INDICATES THAT AMOUNT OF RS. 15,00,000/- WAS RECEIV ED FROM SHRI ASHISH KOHLI VIDE CHEQUE NO. 0042094 DRAWN ON HSBC BANK. T HE CONFIRMATION ALONG WITH OTHER DOCUMENTS WERE MISPLACED IN THE AP PELLANT'S OFFICE AND THAT'S WHY THEY COULD NOT BE FILED. SINCE NOW THE A PPELLANT IS NOT IN GOOD TERMS WITH SHRI ASHISH KOHLI, HE HAS REFUSED TO COO PERATE. IT IS THEREFORE, ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 42 REQUESTED THAT ENQUIRIES MAY KINDLY BE MADE DIRECTL Y FROM THE CREDITOR AT THE COST OF THE APPELLANT. IT IS BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE APPELLANT TO OBTAIN ANY DOCUMENT FROM THE CREDITOR. THE APPELLAN T DOES NOT HAVE ANY AUTHORITY TO ENFORCE COMPLIANCE BY THE CREDITOR OF THE REQUIREMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT. THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES HAVE ALL TH E POWERS TO ENFORCE THE PRODUCTION 0NECESSARY DOCUMENTS FROM ANYBODY AN D EVERYBODY INCLUDING THE PERSONAL ATTENDANCE. IN FACT, LOAN OF RS. 15 LACS WAS TAKEN ON 9/2/2005 AND RETURNED ON 16/2/2005 THROUGH ALC P AYEE CHEQUES ONLY. LEDGER ACCOUNT OF ANDHRA BANK IN THE BOOKS OF THE A PPELLANT ALONGWITH BANK STATEMENT WERE FILED BEFORE THE LD. AO BUT HE IGNORED THE SAME. THE BANK STATEMENT CLEARLY INDICATES THAT RS. 15 LA CS WERE RECEIVED VIDE CHEQUE NO. 0042094 AND WERE PAID BACK TO SHRI ASHIS H KOHLI ON 16/2/2005 VIDE CHEQUE NO. 0980913. SIMILARLY LEDGER ACCOUNT OF STANDARD CHARTERED BANK INDICATES RECEIPT OF RS. 7. 02 LACS FROM M/S DESIGN ONE WHICH WAS OUTSTANDING AS ON 31ST MARCH, 2005 AS INDICATED IN THE BALANCE SHEET. SINCE THE CREDITS ARE GENUINE , THE ADDITION MAY KINDLY BE DELETED. IN CASE OF ANY DOUBT ABOUT THE G ENUINENESS I CREDITWORTHINESS, SUMMONS I COMMISSION ULS 131 MAY KINDLY BE ISSUED TO SHRI ASHISH KOHLI AT OUR COST FOR VERIFICATION OF T HE CREDITS IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE.' 35. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE AO'S ORDER, THE AR'S SUBM ISSIONS, THE REMAND REPORT AND THE REJOINDER BY THE AR AS WELL AS THE P OSITION OF LAW AND THE FACTS OF CASE. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE DOCUMENT, IT IS FOUND THAT AMOUNT OF RS. 7,20,000/- WAS RECEIVED FROM M/S DESIGN ONE VIDE CHEQUE NO. ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 43 020201 DRAWN ON HSBC BANK, DLF-II, MAHRAULI GURGAON ROAD, DELHI. SIMILARLY, RS. 15 LACS WERE RECEIVED VIDE CHEQUE NO . 0042094 DRAWN ON HSBC BANK ND WERE PAID BACK TO SHRI ASHISH KOHLI ON 16/2/2005 VIDE CHEQUE NO. 0980913. BO H THE TRANSACTIONS WERE THRO UGH PROPER BANKING CHANNEL. NO EVIDENCE OR OTHER INCRIMINATING DOCUMEN T WAS EITHER FOUND OR SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH TO SUGGEST AN Y NON GENUINENESS OF SUCH TRANSACTION. THE APPELLANT HAD TO THIS EXTENT DISCHARGED HIS ONUS TO EXPLAIN THE FACT OF RECEIPT OF CREDITS WHICH THE AO FAILED TO REBUT OTHERWISE. THEREFORE, AS DISCUSSED IN PARAS ABOVE, NO ADDITION COULD HAVE BEEN MADE AND HENCE THIS ADDITION IS ALSO HERE BY DELETED. THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FINDINGS, GROUND NO . 3 IS ALLOWED. 10. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) , WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS ELABORATELY DISCUSSED THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE IN COMING TO HIS CONCLUSION IN DELETING THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS, WE DO NOT FIND ANY FLAW OR INFIRMITY TO TAKE A CONTRARY DECISION. 101. EVEN OTHERWISE, WE ALSO FIND THAT THE ISSUE I N DISPUTE IS ALSO COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT IN THE CAS E OF CIT(CENTRAL)-III VS. KABUL CHAWLA IN ITA NO. 707, 709, 713/DEL/2014 WHER EIN THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS HELD THAT IF THE ADDITIONS ARE MADE, BUT NOT BASED ON ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING SEARCH OPERATIO N, THEN THESE ADDITIONS WERE NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE EYES OF LAW. FOR THE SAKE OF CLARITY, WE ALSO REPRODUCING THE RELEVANT PARA NO. 37 & 38 OF THE JUDGMENT AS UN DER:- 37. ON A CONSPECTUS OF SECTION 153A(1) OF THE ACT, READ WITH THE PROVISOS THERETO, AND IN THE LIGHT OF THE LAW EXPLA INED IN THE ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 44 AFOREMENTIONED ITA NOS. 707, 709 AND 713 OF 2014 OF DECISIONS, THE LEGAL POSITION THAT EMERGES IS AS UNDER: I. ONCE A SEARCH TAKES PLACE UNDER SECTION 132 OF T HE ACT, NOTICE UNDER SECTION 153 A (1) WILL HAVE TO BE MANDATORILY ISSUE D TO THE PERSON SEARCHED REQUIRING HIM TO FILE RETURNS FOR SIX AYS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE AY IN WHICH THE SEARCH TAKES PLACE. II. ASSESSMENTS AND REASSESSMENTS PENDING ON THE DA TE OF THE SEARCH SHALL ABATE. THE TOTAL INCOME FOR SUCH AYS WILL HAV E TO BE COMPUTED BY THE AOS AS A FRESH EXERCISE. III. THE AO WILL EXERCISE NORMAL ASSESSMENT POWERS IN RESPECT OF THE SIX YEARS PREVIOUS TO THE RELEVANT AY IN WHICH THE SEAR CH TAKES PLACE. THE AO HAS THE POWER TO ASSESS AND REASSESS THE 'TOTAL INCOME' OF THE AFOREMENTIONED SIX YEARS IN SEPARATE ASSESSMENT ORD ERS FOR EACH OF THE SIX YEARS. IN OTHER WORDS THERE WILL BE ONLY ONE AS SESSMENT ORDER IN RESPECT OF EACH OF THE SIX AYS IN WHICH BOTH THE D ISCLOSED AND THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME WOULD BE BROUGHT TO TAX. IV. ALTHOUGH SECTION 153 A DOES NOT SAY THAT A DDITIONS SHOULD BE STRICTLY MADE ON THE BASIS OF EVIDENCE FOUND IN THE COURSE OF THE SEARCH, OR OTHER POST-SEARCH MATERIAL OR INFORMATION AVAIL ABLE WITH THE AO WHICH CAN BE RELATED TO THE EVIDENCE FOUND, IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE ASSESSMENT CAN BE ARBITRARY OR MADE WITHOUT ANY RE LEVANCE OR NEXUS WITH THE SEIZED MATERIAL. OBVIOUSLY AN ITA NOS. 707 , 709 AND 713 OF 2014 OF ASSESSMENT HAS TO BE MADE UNDER THIS SECTIO N ONLY ON THE BASIS OF SEIZED MATERIAL. V. IN ABSENCE OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL, THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT CAN BE REITERATED AND THE ABATED ASSESSMENT OR REAS SESSMENT CAN BE MADE. THE WORD 'ASSESS' IN SECTION 153 A IS RELATAB LE TO ABATED PROCEEDINGS (I.E. THOSE PENDING ON THE DATE OF SEAR CH) AND THE WORD 'REASSESS' TO COMPLETED ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. VI. INSOFAR AS PENDING ASSESSMENTS ARE CONCERN ED, THE JURISDICTION TO MAKE THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT AND THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 153A MERGES INTO ONE. ONLY ONE ASSESSMENT SHALL BE MADE SEPARATELY FOR EACH AY ON THE BASIS OF THE FINDINGS OF THE SEARCH AND A NY OTHER MATERIAL EXISTING OR BROUGHT ON THE RECORD OF THE AO. VII. COMPLETED ASSESSMENTS CAN BE INTERFERED WI TH BY THE AO WHILE MAKING THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 153 A ONLY ON T HE BASIS OF SOME INCRIMINATING MATERIAL UNEARTHED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH OR REQUISITION OF DOCUMENTS OR UNDISCLOSED INCOME OR PROPERTY DISCOVERED IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH WHICH WERE NOT PRODUCED OR NOT ALREADY DISCLOSED OR MADE KNOWN IN THE COURSE OF ORIGINAL A SSESSMENT. 38. THE PRESENT APPEALS CONCERN AYS, 2002-03, 2005 -06 AND 2006-07.ON THE DATE OF THE SEARCH THE SAID ASSESSME NTS ALREADY STOOD COMPLETED. SINCE NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL WAS UNEA RTHED DURING THE SEARCH, NO ADDITIONS COULD HAVE BEEN MADE TO THE INCOME ALREADY ASSESSED. ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 45 10.2 WE FURTHER FIND THAT THE HONBLE HIGH COURT I N THE CASE OF CIT VS. JAKSON ENGINEERS LTD. VIDE ORDER DATED 7.12.2015 RE PORTED IN 2015-TIOL-2789- HC-DEL-IT HAS DEALT THE SIMILAR ISSUE WHEREIN TH E DECISION OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. KABUL CHAWLA (SUP RA) WAS DISCUSSED AND FOLLOWED. 10.3 AFTER GOING THROUGH THE IMPUGNED ORDER AS WELL AS THE CASE LAWS CITED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND THE CASE L AW IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. KABUL CHAWLA (SUPRA) AND CIT VS. JAKSON ENGINEERS L TD. (SUPRA), WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ASSESSMENT /REASSESSMENT P ROCEEDINGS U/S. 153A OF THE I.T. ACT, CAN BE BASED ONLY ON INCRIMINATING MATERI AL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. AS PER RECORD, THE AO IS NOT BASED UPON INCRIMINATING MATERIAL/ DOCUMENTS FOUND IN THE SEARCH OPERATIONS. THEREFOR E, THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE EYES OF LAW. THUS, TH E LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY ADJUDICATED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE. RESPECTFULLY, FOLLOWING THE VARIOUS DECISIONS OF TH E HONBLE HIGH COURT AND THE TRIBUNAL MENTIONED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND ALSO R ESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASES OF CIT VS. KABUL CHAWLA (SUPRA) AND CIT VS. JAKSON ENGINEERS LTD. (S UPRA), WE UPHOLD THE WELL REASONED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE GROUND NO. 3, 4 & 5 RAISED IN THE REVENUES APPEAL. 11. APROPOS GROUND NO. 6 RELATING TO DELETION OF AD DITION OF RS. 27,02,471/- RECEIVED AS GIFT FROM M/S INTERNATIONAL WORLD WIDE AS THE IDENTITY AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE DONOR HAS NOT BEEN ANALYSED BY THE CIT(A) IS CONCERNED, WE FIND THAT AN AMOUNT OF RS. 27,02,4 71/- WAS FOUND CREDITED IN ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 46 THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE SAME W AS REFLECTED IN THE NATURE OF GIFT RECEIVED DURING THE RELEVANT PERIOD UNDER CONSIDERATION. WE ALSO FIND THAT IT IS ON RECORD THAT THE SAID GIFT WAS RECEIV ED FROM ONE PARTY NAMELY, M/S INTERNATIONAL WORLDWISE WHICH WAS STATED TO BE OWNE D BY ONE TIME CLOSE FAMILY FRIEND, MR. DIKSHANT SAKHUJA, OF THE ASSESSE E. IT WAS ALSO SEEN THAT THE SAID FRIEND OF THE ASSESSEE ALSO MADE A GIFT IN THE PREVIOUS FINANCIAL YEAR TO HIS FATHER, MR. VINAY PURI. THE FACT OF THE GIFT WAS D ISCLOSED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, CAPITAL ACCOUNT AND STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS A LREADY FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH THE AO. THE SAID AMOUNT WAS SHOWN TO HAVE BE EN RECEIVED THROUGH NORMAL BANKING CHANNELS AND STOOD REFLECTED AND DIS CLOSED PRIOR TO THE SEARCH. NO EVIDENCE OR OTHER INCRIMINATING DOCUMENT WAS EIT HER FOUND OR SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH TO SUGGEST ANY NON-GENUINENESS OF SUCH TRANSACTION. THE ASSESSEE HAD DISCHARGED HIS ONUS TO EXPLAIN THE FAC T OF RECEIPT OF SUCH GIFT WHICH THE AO FAILED TO REBUT OTHERWISE. THEREFORE, LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADDITIONS IN DISPUTE, WHICH IN OUR OPIN ION NEEDS NO INTERFERENCE ON OUR PART, HENCE, WE UPHOLD THE SAME AND DISMISS THE GROUND NO. 6 RAISED BY THE REVENUE. 12. APROPOS GROUND NO. 7 RELATING TO DELETION OF AD DITION OF RS. 51,000/- RECEIVED AS A GIFT FROM SH. RAJESH MOH AN, IS CONCERNED, WE FIND THAT THE GIFT OF RS. 51,000/- WAS GIVEN ON THE OCC ASION OF MARRIAGE, IT IS NOT TAXABLE U/S. 56. SINCE, THE FACTS ABOUT THE CREDIT WORTHINESS ARE SAME AS IN THE CASE OF MR. VARUN PURI, CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE DON OR IS CONSIDERED AS ESTABLISHED AS DISCUSSED IN DETAIL IN RESPECT OF CR EDIT FROM SH. VARUN PURI, ACCORDINGLY, LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADD ITION AND TREATED THE SAME AS ITA NOS. 3375&3376/DEL/2011 47 EXPLAINED. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE LD. CI T(A) HAS PASSED A WELL REASONED ORDER WHICH DOES NOT NEED ANY INTERFERENCE ON OUR PART, HENCE, WE UPHOLD THE SAME AND DISMISS THE GROUND NO. 7 RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN ITS APPEAL. ITA NO. 3376/DEL/2011 (AY. 2006-07) 13. THE GROUND NO. 1 & 6 ARE GENERAL. WITH REGARD TO GROUND NO. 2 TO 5 ARE CONCERNED, FOLLOWING OUR CONSISTENT VIEW TAKEN IN I TA NO. 3375/DEL/2011 (AY 2005-06), AS AFORESAID, THE GROUND NO. 2 TO 5 ALSO STAND DISMISSED AND ACCORDINGLY, THE ITA NO. 3376/DEL/2011 (AY 2006-07 ) ALSO STAND DISMISSED. 14. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE REVENUES APPEALS STAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30/03/2016. SD/- SD/- (O.P. KANT) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIA L MEMBER DATED: 30/03/2016 *SR BHATNAGAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSITANT REGISTRAR