M/s Rapid Packaging Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT (HQ), New Delhi

ITA 3576/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 90922 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-04-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 09-04-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 04-06-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIKRAM SAHAY
• Assessee Lawyers: V RAJA KU M
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Unexplained investment; Accommodation entries
• Section: 143(3); 68; 69

Judgement Text

IN TH E INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G .C. GUPTA , HON BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI I NTURI RAMA RAO , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 3576 /DEL/201 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 8 - 09 RAPID PACKAGING LTD. VS. DCIT (HQ) 802, PADMA TRA VEL II CENTRAL CIRCLE - III 22, RAJENDRA PLACE NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI - 110008 (PAN AA A C R 1029 E ) ( APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DATE OF HEARING : 10 .0 4 .2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22. 0 4 .2015 APPELLANT BY : S RI V. RAJA KU M AR ADVOC ATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VIKRAM SAHAY , SR. DR ORDER PER SHRI I NTURI RAMA RAO , A M : 1. THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESEE COMPANY FOR THE AY 2008 - 09 AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - XXXIII DATED 20.03.2013 IN ITA NO. 391/1 0 - 11/363 RAISING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS APPEAL: 1. CONFIRMING ADDITION AND EVEN VENTURING TO MAKE AN ENHANCEMENT OF THE INCOME RETURNED, WITHOUT CONFRONTING ANY OF THE FOLLOWING MATERIAL TO THE ASSESSEE: A ) MATERIAL SEIZED FROM THE LAPTOP AND OTHERWISE DURING THE SURVEY OPERATION DATED 20.11.2007, UPON SHRI S.K. GUPTA; B ) STATEMENT OF SHRI S.K. GUPTA; IT A NO. 3576 /DEL /201 3 2 2. RETURNING AN INCORRECT FINDING THAT THE DETAILS OF BENEFICIARIES TO WHOM PAYMENTS WERE MADE BY THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT APPEARING IN THE SEIZED MATERIAL, THOUGH THI S HAD BEEN CLEARLY DEMONSTRATED THROUGH BANK PARTICULARS THEMSELVES. 3. NOT APPRECIATING THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS ONLY A CONDUIT FOR FUNDS TRANSFER AND HENCE, THE CREDITS IN THE ASSESSEE S BOOKS COULD NOT HAVE BEEN TREATED AS ITS INCOME UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961; 4. NOT APPRECIATING THE COMPLETE IMPART OF THE PROCEEDINGS IN SHRI S.K. GUPTA S CASE, IGNORING THAT SUCH EVIDENCE IS DEEMED TO BE CORRECT AS PER SECTION 292(2) OF THE ACT; 5. NOT RETURNING A COGENT FINDING ON THE ASPECT OF C REDITS IN THE ASSESSEE S BOOKS ALSO HAVING BEEN TAXED IN THE HANDS OF THE OTHER INTERMEDIARIES; 6. NOT ACCEPTING THE FINDINGS GIVEN IN THE ORDER U/S 245(D)(4) OF THE ACT DATED 22.6.2012 PASSED BY THE HON BLE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION IN THE CASE OF SHRI S.K. G UPTA; 7. IGNORING THAT IN RESPECT OF A.Y. 2004 - 05, THE LD. ADDL CIT HAD ISSUED DIRECTIONS U/S 144A OF THE ACT ON IDENTICAL FACTS, TO THE EFFECT THAT NO ADDITION WAS TO BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE, SINE IT WAS ONLY A CONDUIT COMPANY; 8. NOT APPRECI ATING THAT IN THE PRECEDING AS WELL AS SUBSEQUENT YEARS, ON IDENTICAL FACTS, THE RETURNED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ACCEPTED AFTER DETAILED SECURITY; 9. ENHANCING THE INCOME BY RS.57,06,000/ - WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE ASSESSEE S REPLY DATED 14.03.2013 ; 10. NOT ALLOWING RELIED IN RESPECT OF: A) RS.1,14,78,813/ - TWICE ADDED IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT AS WELL AS IN THE HANDS OF THE VARIOUS OTHER CONDUIT COMPANIES FROM WHOM THE AMOUNTS WERE BEFORE HIM. B) CASH DEPOSITED INTO THE BANK ACCOUNT OUT OF THE CASH AVAILABLE WITH THE COMPANY; C) EXCESS ADDITION OF RS.1,387/ - ON ACCOUNT OF DEPOSIT IN ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE. IT A NO. 3576 /DEL /201 3 3 2. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09 ON 29.09.2008, DECLA RING INCOME OF RS.8,062/ - . AFTER PROCESSING THE RETURN OF INCOME U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT, THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY BY ISSUING NOTICE U/S 143(2) AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER CAME TO BE PASSED ON 27.12.2012 U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT AT THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS .1,14,99,560/ - . THE DISPARITY BETWEEN RETURNED AND ASSESSED INCOME WAS ON ACCOUNT OF ADDITION OF RS.1,14,90,113/ - FOUND DEPOSITED IN BANK ACCOUNT NAMELY, SOUTH INDIAN BANK (C.R . PARK) NEW DELHI BEARING ACCOUNT NO. 03580 73000002321 HELD IN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING, THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,14,90,113/ - WAS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS CALLED UPON TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE FOR SUCH CASH DEPO SITS. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD EXPLAINED THAT IT WAS ONE OF THE GROUP CONCERNS OF ONE MR. S.K. GUPTA. MR. S.K. GUPTA IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES TO VARIOUS PERSONS. THE MODUS OPERA N DI OF BUSINESS OF MR. GUPTA WAS EXPLAINED AS FOLLOWS: - . SH. S.K. GUPTA OPERATES A NUMBER OF ACCOUNTS IN THE SAME BANK/ BRANCH OR IN DIFFERENT BRANCHES, IN THE NAMES OF COMPANIES/FIRMS/PROPRIETARY CONCERNS AND IN DI VIDUALS. FOR THE OPERATION OF THESE BANK ACCOUNTS, PERSONS WHO ARE FILING INCOME TAX RETURNS ARE ROPED IN. LIKE ANY OTHER BUSINESS IT DOES REQUIRE MAN POWER ACCORDING TO THE SCALE OF OPERATIONS EXCEPT FOR TWO OR THREE PERSONS WHO ARE REQUIRED REGULARLY TO VISIST BANKS AND DO OTHER WORK LIKE COLLECTION OF CASH ETC. MOST OF THE OTHER PER SONS INVOLVED ARE ON PART TIME BASIS. THE PART TIME EMPLOYEES ARE CALLED AS AND WHEN REQUIRED TO SING DOCUMENTS, CHEQUES BOOKS ETC. SH. S.K. GUPTA IT A NO. 3576 /DEL /201 3 4 HAS ALSO ROPED IN HIS OWN RELATIVES FOR OPERATION OF VARIOUS BANK ACCOUNTS AND FOR FILING THE INCOME TAX RETU RNS. IT WAS SEEN THAT SH. S.K. GUPTA WAS CONTROLLING MORE THAN 35 COMPANIES FROM A SMALL OFFICE PREMISES WITHOUT SUFFICIENT INFRASTRUCTURE OR EMPLOYEES TO CARRY OUT MEANINGFUL BUSINESS ACTIVITY IN SO MANY COMPANIES. 2.1 FURTHER, FROM THE PERUSAL OF LEDGER ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED IN ONE OF THE LAPTOPS IMPOUNDED DURING SURVEY, IT IS NOTICED THAT A LARGE AMOUNT OF CASH IS DEPOSITED AND CHEQUES ARE ISSUE ON THE SAME DAY/WITHIN FEW DAYS TO VARIOUS PARTIES FROM THE ACCOUNTS OF THE COMPANY CONTROLLED BY HIM. AS PER E NQUIRIES CARRIED OUT BY THE INVESTIGATION WING THE ASSESSEE WAS FOUND TO HAVE BEEN USING THE BANK ACCOUNTS OPENED IN DIFFERENT BANKS TO ROUTE THE ENTRIES THROUGH TWO TO FOUR ACCOUNTS TO GIVE THE COLOR OF GE NUINENESS TO THESE TRANSACTIONS. 3. THE ASSESS ING OFFICER CALLED FOR THE SPECIFIC EXPLANATION FOR THE SOURCES FOR THE CASH DEPOSITED VIDE LETTERS DATED 1.11.2010 AND 02.12.2010. IN RESPONSE TO THE SPECIFIC QUERY, WHAT ALL THE ASSESSEE COMPANY SUBMITTED WAS THAT IT BELONGS TO GROUP OF COMPANIES OWNED B Y MR. GUPTA ONLY COMMISSION INCOME WAS EARNED IN CONSIDERATION OF PROVIDING THE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING FOUND THE EXPLANATION OFFERED UNSATISFACTORY , BROUGHT THE AMOUNT TO THE TAXED PLACING RELIANCE ON THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS: - I) THE HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASES OF ROSHAN DI HATT VS. CIT REPORTED IN (1977) 107 ITR 938 AND KALE KHAN MOHAMMAD HANIF VS. CIT REPORTED IN (1963) 50 ITR 1, HELD AS UNDER: II) SUMATI DAYAL VS. CIT REPORTED IN (1995) 80 TAXMAN 89/214 ITR 801 HELD A S UNDER: - III) THE HON BLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. R.S. RATHORE (1995) 212 ITR 309 IV) THE HON BLE PATNA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. BAHRI BROS. PVT. LTD. REPORTED IN (1985) 154 ITR 244. IT A NO. 3576 /DEL /201 3 5 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ABOVE ASSESSMENT ORD ER, AN APPEAL WAS PREFERRED BEFORE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) - XXXIII, NEW DELHI, WHO VIDE ORDER DATED 20.03.2013 DISMISSED THE APPEAL. BEFORE THE CIT(A) IT WAS SUBMITTED INTER ALIA THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS MERELY A CONDUIT FOR PROVIDING ENTRI ES TO THE BENEFICIARY AGAINST CASH GIVEN BY THEM. THE CASH IS DEPOSITED IN THE VARIOUS BANK ACCOUNTS. AND AS ALREADY SUBMITTED, CHEQUES ARE ISSUED THROUGH THESE ASSESSEE COMPANIES TO THE ULTIMATE BENEFICIARIES. HENCE, IT IS RESPECTFULLY PRAYED THAT NO INCO ME OTHER THAN THAT DISCLOSED IN THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT/RETURN OF INCOME IMMURES TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. ALL THE DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WHICH STANDS FULLY EXPLAINED. IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSITION THAT ONLY COMMISSION INCOME ALONE SHOULD BE TAXED I N THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY RELIANCE WAS PLACED BY HON BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF MANOJ AGARWAL AND SPECIAL BENCH DECISION OF MUMBAI TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE GOLD STAR FINVEST P. LTD. V. ITO, MUMBAI IN ITA NO. 4625/MUM/2005 . THE LD. CIT(A) AFT ER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS HAD TURNED DOWN THE PLEA OF ASSESSEE COMPANY BY HOLDING THAT HON BLE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION HAS NOT GIVEN ANY COMMENTS FOR CREDIT IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY, WHICH IS NOT CHANGED AFTER ADMISSION THAT IT AS A CONDUIT COMPANY. THEREFORE, IS NO WAY, THE ORDER OF SETTLEMENT COMMISSION SUPPORT THE IN APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 68 IN APPELLANT S CASE, AS THE ORDER OF HON BLE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION HAS ONLY QUANTIFIED SAME COMMISSION INCOME IN THE HANDS OF SH. S.K. GUPTA. IT A NO. 3576 /DEL /201 3 6 5. AGGRIEVED BY THIS ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL WAS FILED BEFORE US. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REITERATED THE SAME SUBMISSIONS AS ADVANCED BEFORE CIT(A) AND PLACED RELIANCE ON THE DECISIONS OF COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S KSA CHITS PVT. LTD. VS. DCIT IN ITA NO. 4647/DEL/2013 DATED 20.03.2015 AND IN THE CASE OF M/S OMNI FARMS PVT. LTD. AND ANR. VS. DCIT IN ITA NO.3477/DEL/2013 DATED 28.01.2015. WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD AS FOLLOWS: - 17. THUS, THERE IS AN ORDER OF THE SE TTLEMENT COMMISSION AS WELL AS THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX UNDER SECTION 144A HOLDING THAT SHRI S.K. GUPTA WAS PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES, HE USED VARIOUS COMPANIES AS CONDUIT FOR PROVIDING THE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES, CASH WAS RECEIVED TH ROUGH MEDIATORS FROM THE PERSONS WHO WANTED TO AVAIL THE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES, SUCH CASH WAS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE CONDUIT COMPANIES AND THEREAFTER, CHEQUE OF THE SIMILAR AMOUNT WAS BEING ISSUED TO THE BENEFICIARIES (I.E. THE PERSON WHO WAN TED TO AVAIL THE ACCOMMODATION ENTRY) WITHIN A DAY OR SO. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HIMSELF IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS ACCEPTED THESE FACTS. CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THESE FACTS AND THE LOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE ORDER OF THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION AS WELL AS ADDITIONAL CIT UNDER SECTION 144A, WE HAVE NO HESITATION TO HOLD THAT THE ADDITION UNDER SECTION 68 CANNOT BE MADE IN THE CASE OF THECONDUIT COMPANIES. THEREFORE, WE DELETE THE ADDITION MADE UNDER SECTION 68 IN THE CASE OF ALL THE NINE COMPANIES, WHICH ARE ADMITTEDLY CONDUIT COMPANIES OF SHRI S.K. GUPTA. 6. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR HAD VEHEMENTLY ARGUED THAT ADDITION SHOULD BE SUSTAINED AS THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FAILED TO OFFER ANY PLAUSIBLE EXPLANATION OF THE SOURCE FOR THE CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESEEE COMPANY. HE FURTHER ARGUED THAT IN THE ORDER OF SETTLEMENT COMMISSION IT WAS NOT CLEAR WHETHER THESE DEPOSITS WERE ALSO DISCLOSED IN HANDS OF MR. S.K. GUPTA WHO ALLEGEDLY IT A NO. 3576 /DEL /201 3 7 PROVIDED THE CASH ACTING AS INTERMEDIARY BETWEEN THE ASSESS EE COMPANY AND THE BENEFICIARY OF THE ACCOMMODATION ENTRY. THE NEXUS BETWEEN THE CASH DEPOSITS AND THE SOURCE OF THE SUCH DEPOSITS WAS NOT PROVED AND THEREFORE, THE ADDITION SHOULD BE SUSTAINED. 7. WE HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES. ON PERUSAL OF ASSESSMENT ORDE R IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO OFFER ANY EXPLANATION FOR THE SOURCES OF CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT NO . 0358073000002321 . IT WAS ONLY DURING THE COURSE OF PROCEEDING BEFORE THE CIT(A), EXPLANATION AS STATED ABOVE WAS FILED. IN OUR CONSIDE RED OPINION THE EXPLANATION DOES NOT CONCLUSIVELY EXPLAIN THE SOURCE FOR THE CASH DEPOSITS. EVEN THE ORDER OF HON BLE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION IN THE CASE OF MR. S.K. GUPTA DOES NOT PROVIDE ANY CLUE ABOUT THE SOURCES FOR THE CASH DEPOSITS IN THE NAME OF THE A SSESSEE COMPANY. NO DOUBT, THE ORDER OF SETTLEMENT COMMISSION ATTAINED FINALITY AND AS A CONSEQUENCE OF IT THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF MR. S.K. GUPTA HAD BECOME CONCLUSIVE. BUT THIS CANNOT BE EXTENDED TO THE CASE OF ASSESSEE COMPANY , IN AS MU CH AS EACH ASSESSMENT IS INDEPENDENT AND SEPARATE. AS WE UNDERSTAND, NO ENTRIES IN RESPECT OF THE CASH DEPOSITS WERE MADE IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT MAINTAINED, IF ANY. IN SUCH CASES, PROVISIONS OF SECTION 69 ARE APPLICABLE AND NOT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 6 8 AS MADE OUT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 69 READS AS UNDER: - 69 WHERE IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE INVESTMENTS WHICH ARE NOT RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, IF ANY, MAINTA INED BY HIM FOR ANY IT A NO. 3576 /DEL /201 3 8 SOURCE OF INCOME, AND THE ASSESSEE OFFERS NO EXPLANATION ABOUT THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF THE INVESTMENTS OR THE EXPLANATION OFFERED BY HIM IS NOT, IN THE OPINION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, SATISFACTORY, THE VALUE OF THE INVESTMENTS MAY BE DEEMED TO BE THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE OF SUCH FINANCIAL YEAR. 7.1. A PLAIN READING OF THE AFORESAID PROVISION WOULD SHOW THAT IT ENVISAGES TWO SITUATIONS WHEN AN ADDITION CAN BE MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENTS. THE FIRST SITUATION BEING, W HERE THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT OFFER ANY EXPLANATION ABOUT THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF THE INVESTMENT. THE SECOND SITUATION BEING, WHERE THE EXPLANATION OFFERED BY HIM IS, IN THE OPINION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, NOT SATISFACTORY. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THERE WAS NO EXPLANATION FILED BEFORE THE AO EXCEPT FILING THE COPY OF THE BANK PASS BOOK AND IT WAS ONLY DURING THE COURSE OF PROCEEDING BEFORE THE CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE COMPANY TRIED TO EXPLAIN THAT THE CASH DEPOSITS WERE MADE OUT OF THE MONEY BELONG TO THE BENEFICI ARY TO WHOM ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES WERE PROVIDED AND THE SAME EXPLANATION WAS REITERATED BEFORE US. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THIS WOULD NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENT OF SECTION 69 OF THE ACT. THERE WAS NO MATERIAL ON RECORD THAT MR. S.K. GUPTA WHO ACTED AS INT ERMEDIARY BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE COMPANY AND THE BENEFICIARY OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES HAD FILED THE CONFIRMATION LETTER STATING THAT AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WAS PROVIDED BY HIM. NOR, THE ORDER OF THE HON BLE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION ESTABLISHES THE AVAILABILITY OF CASH WITH MR. GUPTA WHEN THE CASH WAS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF ASSESSEE COMPANY. THIS ISSUE IS ESSENTIALLY BASED ON THE FACTS. THEREFORE, THE RELIANCE PLACED BY THE LD. AR ON THE IT A NO. 3576 /DEL /201 3 9 ORDERS OF THE COORDINATE BENCHES OF THIS TRIBUNAL I N THE CASE OF M/S KSA CHITS PVT. LTD. VS. DCIT IN ITA NO. 4647/DEL/2013 DATED 20.03.2015 AND IN THE CASE OF M/S OMNI FARMS PVT. LTD. AND ANR. VS. DCIT IN ITA NO.3477/DEL/2013 (SUPRA) IS NOT OF ANY HELP. IN ANOTHER CASE INVOLVING IDENTICAL FACTS, THE HON B LE COORDINATE BENCH IN THE CASE OF TARUN GOYAL & ANR. VS. ACIT IN ITA NO. 4636 & 4637/DEL/2012 DATED 18.10.2013 HAD SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE FOLLOWING DIRECTIONS: 22. ADMITTEDLY CERTAIN ASSESSMENT OF SHRI TARUN GOYAL, THE KIN PIN ARE AT VARIOUS STAGES AND HAVE NOT REACHED THE TRIBUNAL. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT WOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE TO HAVE IN OVER ALL VIEW OF THE MATTER AND ELIMINATE CHAIN/MULTIPLE TRANSACTION, FOR ARRIVING AT THE CORRECT ASSESSABLE AMOUNT. THUS W E HAVE NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE BUT TO SET ASIDE ALL THESE APPEALS TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 23. THE AO SHALL AFTER EXAMINING THE EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE, CONSIDER ALL THE CASES TOGETHER AND; A) RESTRICT TH E ADDITION U/S 68 TO ONLY THE PEAK UNEXPLAINED CREDIT IN EACH CASE AFTER ELIMINATION CIRCULAR TRANSACTION. B) TO ELIMINATE TAXATION OF THE SAME AMOUNT MULTIPLE TIMES, DUE TO THE CHAIN TRANSACTIONS WHICH RESULTED DUE TO LAYERING INDULGED BY THE ASSESSEE. C) CONSIDER THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND THE PRECEDENCE AVAILABLE ON THE ISSUE AND DETERMINE THE PERCENTAGE OF COMMISSION, WHICH THE ASSESSEES WOULD HAVE EARNED AND BRING THE SAME TO TAX. 8. IN THE PRESENT CASE ALSO WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WOULD BE MET , IF THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL VERIFY THE DISCLOSURE MADE IN THE CASE OF MR. S.K. GUPTA BEFORE THE HON BLE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION AND WHETHER THE AMOU NT IT A NO. 3576 /DEL /201 3 10 OF CASH DEPOSITED IN THE PRESENT CASE IS COVERED BY SUCH DISCLOSURE. IF THE CASH DEPOSITED IN THE ASSESSEE CASE IS COVERED , IN THE DISCLOSURE OF MR. S.K. GUPTA BEFORE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, THE ADDITION MAY BE DELETED. HENCE , THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR S TATISTICAL PURPOSES. TH E ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 2 ND APRIL , 201 5 . SD/ - SD/ - ( G.C. GUPTA ) ( I NTURI RAMA RAO ) V ICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 2 2 ND APRIL , 201 5 . AKS/ - COPY FORWARDED TO 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CIT(A) 5 . DR ASST . REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI