Sunjoss Internet Pvt Ltd, New Delhi V. ITO WARD - 24(3), New Delhi

ITA 3954/DEL/2019

AI Insights

Sunjoss Internet Pvt. Ltd. appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-8, New Delhi, which had upheld the additions made by the Assessing Officer regarding unexplained cash credits and expenditure for the assessment year 2010-11. The Assessing Officer had initially made these additions based on information that the appellant was a beneficiary of accommodation entries provided by Shri Pradeep Kumar Jindal and his group companies. Despite multiple opportunities, the appellant failed to appear or provide any evidence to counter the allegations during the appellate proceedings. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the lower authorities' findings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 116205 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 10 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: DismissedDismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 19-03-2023
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 02-05-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 68; 69; 143(1); 250

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘D’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3954/Del/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sunjoss Internet Pvt. Ltd. 211, Ansal Bhawan, 16 KG Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi. PAN: AAHCS3923N VersuS Income-tax Officer, Ward 24(3), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: None Revenue by: Sh.Harpal Singh Kharab, Ld. Sr. DR Date of hearing : 20/03/2023 Date of order : 29/03/2023 ORDER PER N.K. CHOUDHRY, J.M. This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee/ Appellant herein, against the order dated 05.02.2019, impugned herein, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-8, New Delhi (in short “Ld. Commissioner”), u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the assessment year 2010-11. ITA No. 3954/Del/2019 2 2. From the record it reveals that several notices fixing for the dates of hearing including on 20.03.2023, were issued to the Appellant at the address given in Form-36, however, the Appellant neither appeared nor filed any adjournment application. Even the Registry do not have any alternative address of the Appellant. Therefore, in the present circumstances, we are constrained to decide this appeal as ex-parte qua Assessee. 3. In the instant case, the Appellant declared an income at “NIL”, by filling its return of income on dated 15.10.2010, which was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer, on the basis of information received from ADIT (Inv.) Unit 2(1), Delhi to the effects that the Appellant being a beneficiary of accommodation entry provider Shri Pradeep Kumar Jindal and its group companies, observed that the Appellant had received a sum of Rs. 1,27,00,000/- M/s. Reena Plastic Pipes Pvt. Ltd. (Now Madhurnath Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.) controlled by Shri Pradeep Kumar Jindal, however failed to discharge its onus of providing the identity and creditworthiness of such party. The Assessing Officer therefore made the additions of Rs. 1,27,00,000/- and Rs. 2,54,000/- respectively u/s. 68 of ITA No. 3954/Del/2019 3 the Act and on account as commission on the above amount of accommodation entry. 4. The Appellant challenged the said additions by filling appeal before the ld. Commissioner, who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal as ex-parte, but on merits. Being aggrieved by the impugned order, the Appellant is in appeal before us. 5. We have given thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below and the material available on record. It reveals from the impugned order that in the first appellate proceedings also, though the Appellant was afforded more than sufficient opportunities by fixing the case for hearing on various occasions by the Ld. Commissioner, however the Assessee either did not appear or made no compliance. Therefore, in the peculiar facts and circumstances, the ld. Commissioner was constrained to decide the appeal as ex-parte but on merit and held “ It is seen from the order of the AO that this is a case of accommodation entry. On merits also, during appellate proceedings, no further ITA No. 3954/Del/2019 4 details have been filed by appellant company, despite allowing opportunity of being heard in that regard, so as to justify its claim that no additions needed to be made in appellant's present case. Therefore on those facts, I have no reason to interfere with the findings of the AO and provide any further relief to appellant in respect of disallowance made by AO. Accordingly, addition of Rs.1,29,54,000/- made by AO, is hereby upheld. Grounds of appeal taken by appellant are dismissed. The other addition of Rs. 2,54,000/- as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the I.T. Act, being consequential in nature is also confirmed herewith.” Before us also, no material/evidence was ever produced by the Appellant, neither is available on record to substantiate the grounds raised in this appeal by the Appellant and to controvert the findings of the ld. Authorities below to the effects “that the Appellant failed to discharge its onus to establish the identity and creditworthiness of the party from whom the amount was received. The Appellant could also not establish the genuineness of the transaction. Therefore, the onus cast upon the Appellant to fulfil the conditions of section 69 of the Act, does not stand discharged.” Consequently, the findings recoded by the ld. Commissioner in the impugned order, does not call for any interference. Accordingly, the impugned order is liable to be affirmed. ITA No. 3954/Del/2019 5 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the Appellant stands dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 29/03/2023. Sd/- Sd/- (ANIL CHATURVEDI) (N.K. CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *aks/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT Assistant Registrar ITAT New Delhi Draft dictated 20.03.2023 Draft placed before author 22.03.2023 Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Order si gned and pronounced on Date of uploading on the website File sent to the Bench Clerk Date on which file goes to the AR Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. Date of dispatch of Order.