Advance Safety System Pvt. LTd., New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 3843/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3740 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 06-06-2011
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 10-09-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SRUJANI MOHANTY
• Assessee Lawyers: RAVI GUPTA; PRAKASH YADAV
• Keywords: Gift; Accommodation entries
• Section: 234B; 143(1); 68; 69; 148; 139

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH A : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI G.E. VEERABHADRAPPA, HONBLE VICE PRES IDENT AND SHRI A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.3843 & 3844/DEL./2009 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2000-01 & 01-02) ADVANCE SAFETY SYSTEM PVT. LTD., VS. ITO, WARD 1(2), 415, SAINIK VIHAR, NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. (PAN/GIR NO.AAACA6187D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : S/SHRI RAVI GUPTA & PRAKASH YADAV, ADV. REVENUE BY : SMT. SRUJANI MOHANTY, SR.DR ORDER PER A.D. JAIN: JM THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2000-01, TAKING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN SUSTAINING THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT U/S 148. 2. THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN UPHOLDING THE A DDITIONS OF RS.971455 MADE BY THE AO U/S 68 OF THE I.T. ACT. 3. THAT HE CIT(A) HAS NOT APPRECIATED THAT IN CASE OF SH ARE APPLICATION MONEY, THE SUPREME COURT HAS HELD THAT NO AD DITION CAN BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE RECIPIENT COMPANY WHER E THE SHAREHOLDERS ARE IDENTIFIED. 4. THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN UPHOLDING THAT TH E PROVISION OF SECTION 234B AND 234C OF THE I.T. ACT, ARE APPLICAB LE IN THE PRESENT CASE. 2. AT THE OUTSET, LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED A T THE BAR THAT GROUND NO.1 IS NOT PRESSED, AND IS REJECTED AS SUCH. 3. APROPOS GROUND NOS.2 & 3, THE ASSESSEE RESIDENT, A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, DECLARED AN INCOME OF `82,270. THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 ON 19.1.01. SUBSEQUENTLY, INFORMATION WAS RECEI VED FROM THE DIT(INV.), I.T.A. NOS.3843 & 3844/DEL./2009 (A.YS. : 2000-01 & 01-02) 2 NEW DELHI THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD ACCEPTED ACCOMM ODATION ENTRIES AMOUNTING TO `971455, FROM THE FOLLOWING 9 PERSONS: (CIT PAGE 2 1-9) THE ABOVE PERSONS WERE STATED TO HAVE NO CREDITWORTHINES S AND WERE SAID TO BE PROVIDING ENTRIES TO PARTIES WHO WISHED TO CONVERT THE IR INCOME EARNED FROM OTHER SOURCES NOT DECLARED TO THE DEPARTMENT, BY MAK ING CASH PAYMENTS TO THOSE PERSONS AND IN TURN TO SHOW THE ENTRIES RECEIVED FROM SUCH PARTIES EITHER AS SHARE APPLICATION MONEY, LOAN, COMMISSION, ETC. AS PER THEIR REQUIREMENTS. ON THE BASIS OF THE SAID INFORMATIO N, THE AO CONDUCTED INDEPENDENT ENQUIRIES AND THEREUPON, BEING SATISFIED TH AT INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE CHARGEABLE TO TAX FOR THE RELEVANT YEAR HAD ES CAPED ASSESSMENT, REOPENED, THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEE, ON 26.3.07. IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S 148 OF THE ACT, THE ASS ESSEE CONTENDED THAT THE RETURN FILED ORIGINALLY U/S 139 OF THE ACT BE TREATED AS RETURN FILED IN RESPONSE TO THE SAID NOTICE. 4. THE AO OBSERVED THAT IN THE STATEMENT RECORDED BEFORE THE DIT(INV.), ONE SHRI HARI OM BANSAL, RESIDENT OF M-1/1, MODEL TO WN-III, NEW DELHI HAD STATED THAT HIS MAIN WORK WAS OF PROVIDING ENTRIES; THAT H E PROVIDED ENTRIES TO ANY PERSON/FIRM/COMPANY AGAINST CASH RECEIVED FROM TH E CONCERNED PERSON/FIRM/COMPANY WHICH WAS DEPOSITED BY HIM IN THE VARIOUS BANK ACCOUNTS OPERATED BY HIM THROUGH VARIOUS PERSONS, IN V ARIOUS NAMES AND AGAINST CASH SO RECEIVED, CHEQUE/DD/PAY ORDER WAS IS SUED FROM THE SAID ACCOUNTS IN THE NAME OF THE PARTY, AGAINST COMMISSION RE CEIVED OF 0.2% OR SO; THAT HE WAS GIVING THE NAMES OF PERSONS, BANK ACCO UNTS AND BRANCHES OF THE BANK ACCOUNTS FROM WHICH THE ENTRIES WERE BEING PRO VIDED BY HIM; THAT ALL SUCH PERSONS, IN WHOSE NAMES THE BANK ACCOUNTS WE RE OPERATED, WERE EITHER LABOUR CLASS OR HIS RELATIVES; THAT NEITHER EACH, NOR ANY OF HIS PERSONS SO ENGAGED BY HIM FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING ENTRIE S EVER GAVE ANY GIFT OR LOAN OR INVESTED IN SHARE APPLICATION OF ANY COMPANY; THAT IN THE LIST OF PERSONS/COMPANIES PROVIDED BY HIM, THE NAMES OF 7 OF THE PERSONS FROM WHOM THE ASSESSEE HAD ACCEPTED ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES, W ERE MENTIONED, GIVING THEIR BANK ACCOUNTS IN CORPORATION BANK, KAMLA NAGAR, DELHI. I.T.A. NOS.3843 & 3844/DEL./2009 (A.YS. : 2000-01 & 01-02) 3 5. THE AO OBSERVED THAT DURING THE INVESTIGATION PROCESS , ADIT(INV.) HAD OBTAINED THE BANK ACCOUNT EXTRACTS OF THE VARIOUS BANK AC COUNTS OPERATED BY SHRI HARI OM BANSAL DIRECTLY OR THROUGH HIS AGENTS. T HE ENTRIES GIVEN BY THE GROUP OF VARIOUS PARTIES WERE LISTED OUT. THE AO OBSE RVED THAT IN THE FORWARDING NOTE IN THE LETTER OF DIT(INV.), ADDRESSED TO THE CIT-I, NEW DELHI, RELATING TO ENTRY PROVIDERS, THE NAME OF SHRI HARI OM B ANSAL, THE DETAILS OF THE BANK ACCOUNT OPERATED BY HIM THROUGH HIS PERSONS AN D THE DETAILS OF THE ACCOUNT OPENED BY HIM IN VARIOUS NAMES, HAD BEEN PRO VIDED; AND THAT THESE DETAILS INCLUDED THE SO-CALLED SHARE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE HAVING BANK ACCOUNTS IN CORPORATION BANK, KAMLA NAGAR, DELHI, FRO M WHICH, THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN PROVIDED ENTRIES OF `971455. THE AO OBSERV ED THAT THE DETAILS PROVIDED, CONFIRMED THAT THE CHEQUES AMOUNTING TO `97145 5 HAD BEEN ISSUED BY THE SAID PERSONS FROM THEIR BANK ACCOUNTS IN CORPOR ATION BANK, KAMLA NAGAR, DELHI-7, IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY AN D THE SAME WAS CREDITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY, WHICH FA CT HAD BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. ACCORD ING TO THE AO, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD NOT BEEN ABLE TO PROVE, PRIMA FA CIE, THE TRANSACTIONS WHICH RESULTED IN CASH CREDIT IN ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, OR THE CAPACITY OF SUCH CREDITOR TO ADVANCE THE MONEY OR EVEN THE GENUINENESS O F THE TRANSACTION. THE AO OBSERVED THAT IT HAD GIVEN ON RECORD THAT THE ASSE SSEE COMPANY HAD TAKEN THE ENTRIES FROM THE VARIOUS PARTIES/PERSONS, FROM THE ACCOUNTS MANAGED BY SHRI HARI OM BANSAL, WHO HAD GIVEN THE STA TEMENT TO THE EFFECT THAT THE TRANSACTIONS WERE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES, AT THE BEH EST OF THE ASSESSEE AND THAT HE HAD NO CREDITWORTHINESS TO PAY THE A MOUNT IN QUESTION; THAT IT HAD ALSO BEEN NOTICED FROM THE BANK STATEMENT, THAT TH ERE WERE CASH DEPOSITS OF EQUIVALENT AMOUNT JUST PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CHEQUE/DD/PO ETC.; THAT THIS CORROBORATED THE STATEMENT OF SHRI HARI OM B ANSAL TO THE EFFECT THAT HE HAD RECEIVED THE MONEY FROM THE ENTRIES SEEKERS AND THE SAME HAD BEEN DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS BEFORE ARRANGING TH E ENTRY. ACCORDINGLY, THE AO ADDED THE AMOUNT OF `971455 U/S 68 OF THE ACT. WHILE DOING SO, IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE SAID AMOUNT HAD BEEN SURRENDERED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR TAXATION, DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING S. 6. BY VIRTUE OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE CIT(A) UPHELD THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO. I.T.A. NOS.3843 & 3844/DEL./2009 (A.YS. : 2000-01 & 01-02) 4 7. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN GROUND NOS.2 & 3 BEFORE US. 8. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, HAS CONTENDED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF `971455 MADE BY THE AO U/S 68 OF THE ACT; THAT WHILE DOING SO, THE CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT IN THE CASE OF THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY, THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT HAS HELD THAT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. LOVELY EXPORTS PVT. LTD., 216 CTR 19 5 (SC) THAT NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE RECIPIENT COMPANY, WHE RE THE SHAREHOLDERS HAD BEEN IDENTIFIED. RELIANCE HAS BEEN PLACED ON C IT VS. BHASKAR MITTER, 73 TAXMAN 437(CAL.), WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT MERELY BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAS RETURNED A FIGURE WHICH IS HIGHER THAN TH E ANNUAL VALUE DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CORRECT LEGAL PRINCIP LES, SUCH HIGHER RENT CANNOT BE TAKEN AS ANNUAL VALUE AND THAT THE TRIBUNAL DI D NOT COMMIT ANY ERROR IN DIRECTING TO FIX THE CORRECT ANNUAL LETTING VALU E IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 23 OF THE ACT, WITH REFERENCE TO TH E MUNICIPAL VALUATION, ALTHOUGH SUCH SUM WAS LOWER THAN THE FIGURE SHOWN BY TH E ASSESSEE IN HIS RETURNS OF TOTAL INCOME. FURTHER, RELIANCE HAS ALSO BE EN PLACED ON THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT, DELIVERED ON 30.8.10, IN I.T.A. NO.989/2010 IN CIT VS. M/S ORBITEL COMMUNICATION P. LTD.(COPY PLACED ON RECORD) WHEREIN, THE HONBLE HIGH COURT DISMISSED THE DEPARTMENTS APPEAL AGAINST THE ACTION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN DELETING THE ADDITIO N OF `1,70,00,000 MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED. FURTHER, RELIANCE HAS ALSO BEEN PLACED ON THE 22.9.10 ORDER O F THE MUMBAI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN I.T.A. NO.4628/MUM./09, FOR ASSESSME NT YEAR 1996-97, IN BALMUKAND P. ACHARYA VS. ITO, WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN H ELD THAT THE INCOME WHICH IS NOT TAXABLE IN LAW CANNOT BE SUBJECTED TO TAX UP ON OFFER OF THE SAME UNDER MIS-CONCEPTION OF LAW, APPLYING THE PRINCIPLE O F ASTOPPEL. 9. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD.SR.DR RELYING ON THE IMPUGNED ORDER, HAS STATED THAT ONCE THE ASSESSEE ITSELF SURRENDERED THE AMOUNT FOR TAXATION, THE AO WAS EFFECTIVELY PRECLUDED FROM CARRYING OUT ENQUIRIES IN THE ASSESSMENT. MOREOVER, IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE INV. WING OF THE DEPARTMENT, THE ENTRY OPERATOR HAD ADMITTED HIS MAIN WORK TO BE OF PROVI DING ENTRIES. HE HAD GIVEN ALL THE DETAILS, INCLUDING THE NAMES OF THE PERSO NS, THE BRANCH OF THE BANK AND THE BANK ACCOUNT FROM WHICH ENTRIES WERE PROV IDED BY HIM. THE I.T.A. NOS.3843 & 3844/DEL./2009 (A.YS. : 2000-01 & 01-02) 5 NAMES OF THE PERSONS FROM WHOM THE ASSESSEE HAD OBTAIN ED THE ENTRIES, WERE SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED BY HIM. THESE CREDITORS W ERE NOT HAVING CREDITWORTHINESS TO ADVANCE THE MONEY. THE AO THUS CORR ECTLY ENTERTAINED THE PRIMA FACIE BELIEF OF CHARGEABLE INCOME OF THE AS SESSEE HAVING ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. HOWEVER, DUE TO THE SURRENDER MADE BY THE ASSESSEE, NO FURTHER INVESTIGATION WAS CARRIED OUT INTO THE MATTER BY THE AO. THE ASSESSEE, ON THE OTHER HAND, FAILED TO APPROVE EITHER TH E CAPACITY OF THE CREDITORS TO ADVANCE THE MONEY OR THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. THE BANK STATEMENT ALSO SHOWED DEPOSITS OF EQUIVALENT AMOUNTS IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CHEQUE/DD/PO, WHICH ALSO THE ASS ESSEE IDD NOT EXPLAIN. THE LD.SR.DR HAS CONTENDED THAT IN THESE FACTS, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) UPHOLDING THE ADDITION RIGHTLY MADE BY THE AO IS OF ALL FOURS, CALLING FOR NO INTERFERENCE AT ALL. 10. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND HAVE PERUSED THE MATE RIAL ON RECORD. THE ISSUE AS TO WHETHER DESPITE THE SURRENDER MADE BY TH E ASSESSEE, THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE DELETED THE ADDITION MADE U/S 68 OF THE ACT. 11. UNDISPUTEDLY, IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE INV. W ING OF THE DEPARTMENT, SHRI HARI OM BANSAL HAD MADE A DETAILED STA TEMENT, GIVING COMPLETE INFORMATION ABOUT HIS MODUS OPERANDI OF PROVI DING ENTRIES. IN HIS STATEMENT, HE HAD SPECIFICALLY NAMED ALL THE CREDITORS O F THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. IT WAS ON THE BASIS OF THESE CATEGORIC INFORM ATION FROM THE INV. WING OF THE DEPARTMENT, THAT THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REOPENED. HOWEVER, IMMEDIATELY UPON BEING INTIMATED TH ESE FACTS, THE ASSESSEE SURRENDERED THE AMOUNT OF `971455, FOR TAXATIO N. THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVE BOTH THE CAPACITY OF ITS CREDITORS TO ADVA NCE THE AMOUNTS, AS WELL AS THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. IT IS SUBS EQUENT STAND, HOWEVER, HAS BEEN AND REMAINS THAT THE MERE FACTUM OF SURRENDER CANNOT LEAD TO THE ADDITION. 12. WE, HOWEVER, DO NOT SUBSCRIBE TO THIS VIEW OF THE A SSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE MAINTAINS THAT THE SURRENDER WAS MADE ONLY TO B UY PEACE AND TO AVOID LEVY OF PENALTY. BUT, THIS IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE SURROUNDING CIRCUMSTANCES. ALL PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE IS AGAINST TH E ASSESSEE. SHRI HARI OM BANSAL HAS GIVEN ALL THE DETAILS OF THE CREDITORS OF THE ASSESSEE. IMMEDIATELY BEFORE THE ISSUANCE OF THE CHEQUE/DDS/POS, SIMILAR AMOUNTS I.T.A. NOS.3843 & 3844/DEL./2009 (A.YS. : 2000-01 & 01-02) 6 WERE DEPOSITED IN THE BANK. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT COME FORWARD, AT ANY STAGE, TO PRODUCE THE CREDITORS, SO AS TO ESTABLISH THE GE NUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS AND THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITORS. 13. IN THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, THE RATIO OF THE DE CISION IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. BHASKAR MITTER, 73 TAXMAN 437 (CAL.) (SU PRA) DOES NOT COME TO THE AID OF THE ASSESSEE. 14. M/S ORBITEL COMMUNICATION (P) LTD. (SUPRA) ALSO DOES NOT HELP THE ASSESSEE. THEREIN, NO SURRENDER HAD BEEN MADE BY TH E ASSESSEE SO AS TO PREEMPT THE AO TO MAKE INVESTIGATION. 15. BALMUKUND P. ACHARYA (SUPRA) IS ALSO NOT APPL ICABLE SINCE THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE PRESENT CASE, IT CANNOT AT ALL BE SAID TH AT THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT TAXABLE. 16. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, FINDING NO MERIT THEREIN, TH E GRIEVANCE SOUGHT TO BE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BY WAY OF GROUND NOS.2 & 3 ARE REJECTED. 17. GROUND NO.4 IS CONSEQUENTIAL. 18. CONSEQUENTLY, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. I.T. A. NO.3844/DEL./2009 19. THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 01-02, TAKING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN SUSTAINING THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT U/S 148. 2. THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN UPHOLDING THE A DDITIONS OF `1,00,150 MADE BY THE AO U/S 68 OF THE I.T. ACT 3. THAT THE CIT(A) HAS NOT APPRECIATED THAT IN CASE OF SH ARE APPLICATION MONEY, THE SUPREME COURT HAS HELD THAT NO AD DITION CAN BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE RECIPIENT COMPANY WHER E THE SHAREHOLDERS ARE IDENTIFIED. 4. THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN UPHOLDING THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 234B AND 234C OF THE I.T. ACT, ARE APPLICAB LE IN THE PRESENT CASE. 20. AT THE OUTSET, LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED AT THE BAR THAT GROUND NO.1 IS NOT PRESSED, REJECTED AS NOT PRESSED. 21. APROPOS GROUND NOS.2 & 3, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY F ILED A RETURN OF INCOME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 DECLARING INCOME OF `56,190. THE I.T.A. NOS.3843 & 3844/DEL./2009 (A.YS. : 2000-01 & 01-02) 7 RETURN WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT. SUBSEQUEN TLY, INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED FROM THE DIT(INV.), DELHI THAT THE ASSESSEE HA D ACCEPTED ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES AMOUNTING TO `1,00,150 I.E. `50,0 75 FROM AJIT SINGH AND `50,075 FROM JOGI RAM AGGARWAL. IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THESE PERSONS HAD NO CREDITWORTHINESS AND WERE PROVIDING ENTRIES TO TH E PARTIES WHO WHISHED TO CONVERT THEIR INCOME EARNED FROM OTHER SOURC ES AND NOT DECLARED TO THE DEPARTMENT, BY MAKING CASH PAYMENTS TO THOSE PERSON S AND IN TURN, TO SHOW THE ENTRIES RECEIVED FROM THE SAID PARTIES, EITHER AS SHARE APPLICATION MONEY OF AS LOAN AS PER THEIR REQUIREMENT. 22. THE AO CONDUCTED INDEPENDENT ENQUIRIES AND GOT SATI SFIED THAT INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX FOR THE RELEVANT YEAR HAD ESCAPED ASS ESSMENT. THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THUS REOPENED. 23. IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING, THE ASSESSING OFFICE R TOOK NOTE OF THE STATEMENT OF SHRI HARI OM BANSAL BEFORE THE INV. DEPARTM ENT, AS ABOVE. 24. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE OF THE PRESENT CASE WITH THAT IN I.T.A. NO.3843 (SUPRA) IS THAT THEREIN, THE ASSESSEE HAD SURRENDERED TH E AMOUNT WHEREAS IN THE PRESENT CASE, THERE IS NO SUCH SURRENDER. 25. IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER ASKED THE ASSESSEE, FURNISHING DETAILS OF THE AMOUNT OF ` 1,00,1 50 ALLEGEDLY RECEIVED AS BOGUS ENTRIES. IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NO T BEEN ABLE TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS, OR THE CAPACITY OF TH E CREDITORS TO ADVANCE THE MONEY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER THUS ADDED THE AMOUNT OF ` 1,00,150. 26. THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION. 27. LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT FOLLOWING THE RATIO OF LOVELY EXPORTS (SUPRA), WHERE IN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT WHERE THE DETAILS OF THE CREDITORS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED, AND EVEN IF THE TRANSACTION WAS FOUND TO BE BOGUS, ADDITION, IF ANY, MA Y BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE CREDITORS; THAT HEREIN, THE ASSESSEE HAD DU LY SUBMITTED THE ACCOUNT STATEMENT OF THE CREDITORS, SHRI AJIT SINGH & SHRI JOGI RAM AGGARWAL; THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO FILED THE COPY OF RETURN FILE D BY THEM FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999-00, COPY OF BALANCE SHEET OF SHR I JOGI RAM AGGARWAL AND SRI AJIT SINGH FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31.3.99; THAT THE REBY THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITORS STOOD DULY ESTABLISHED. I.T.A. NOS.3843 & 3844/DEL./2009 (A.YS. : 2000-01 & 01-02) 8 28. LD.SR.DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE IMPUGNED ORDER. IT HAS BEEN STATED THAT LIKE IN T HE EARLIER YEAR S, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO DISCHARGE THE ONUS U/S 69 OF THE ACT; THAT TH E SPECIFIC DETAILS WERE PROVIDED BY SHRI HARI OM BANSAL IN THE STATEMENT B EFORE THE INV. WING OF THE DEPARTMENT; THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS REMAINED UNABLE TO REBUT THIS POINTED DEPOSITION OF SHRI HARI OM BANSAL BEFORE THE I NV. WING OF THE DEPARTMENT; AND THAT THEREFORE, THE CIT(A) CORRECTLY CONFI RMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 29. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT IN THIS CASE AS OPPOSED TO THE ONE IN I.T.A. N O.3843 (SUPRA), THERE IS NO SURRENDER INVOLVED, AND SUCH, THE PLEA OF THE DEPA RTMENT OF THE ASSESSEE HAVING PREVENTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT THE VERY THRES HOLD FROM CARRYING OUT FROM INVESTIGATION, DOES NOT HOLD GOOD. UNDISPUTEDL Y, HEREIN, THE DETAILS, AS ABOVE, WITH REGARD TO THE CREDITORS OF THE ASSESSEE W ERE NOT SUPPLIED BY THE ASSESSEE. THAT BEING SO, LOVELY EXPORT (SUPRA) COMES INTO PLAY AND IN KEEPING THEREWITH, THE ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSES SEE IS NOT CALLED FOR. INTERESTINGLY, WHILE IN I.T.A. NO.3843 (SUPRA), WHERE SURRENDER IS INVOLVED, THE CIT(A) HAS REFERRED TO AND DISTINGUISHED LOVELY EXPO RTS (SUPRA), IN THE PRESENT CASE WHERE THE SURRENDER IS INVOLVED AND WHER E THE ASSESSEE HAD DULY SUPPLIED THE DETAILS OF ITS CREDITORS TO THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER, THE CIT(A) DOES NOT EVEN MAKE A REFERENCE TO THE LOVELY EXPORT, THOUGH IT IS SQUARELY APPLICABLE. 30. CONSEQUENTLY, I.T.A. NO.3844 FILED BY THE ASSESSE E IS ALLOWED. 31. IN THE RESULT, WHEREAS I.T.A. NO.3843 FOR ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2000-01 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED, I.T.A. NO.3844 FOR ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2000-01 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 10.06.2011. SD/- SD/- (G.E. VEERABHADRAPPA) (A.D. JAIN) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: JUNE 10, 2011. *SKB* I.T.A. NOS.3843 & 3844/DEL./2009 (A.YS. : 2000-01 & 01-02) 9 COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A)-IV, NEW DELHI. 5. THE DR, ITAT, LOKNAYAK BHAWAN, KHAN MARKET, NEW DELHI. AR/ITAT