Jyotsna Sukumar, Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 4064/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: 406420114 RSA 2015
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 2
• Next Hearing Date: 13-08-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS RAKHI VIMAL
• Keywords: Reopening of assessment; Accommodation entries
• Section: 68; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : SMC-II : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.4064 & 4065/DEL/2015 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2006-07 & 2009-10 JYOTSNA SUKUMAR, 1516, 2 ND FLOOR, WAZINAGAR, KOTLA MUBARAKPUR, DELHI. PAN: AMHPS4797H VS. ITO, WARD-32(4), NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI TARUN ROHATGI, CA DEPARTMENT BY : MRS. RAKHI VIMAL, JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 13. 08.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.10.2015 ORDER BOTH THESE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AG AINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A)-XVIII, NEW DELHI, DATED 30.3.2 015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07 AND 2009-10. ITA NOS.4064 & 4065/DEL/2015 2 2. SINCE THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS ARE C OMMON, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THESE ARE HEARD TOGETHER AND DISPOS ED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 3. IN BOTH THE APPEALS THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGES THE ASSESSMENT AS WELL AS THE ADDITION MADE U/S 68 OF THE ACT. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND HAVE PERU SED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE REASONS FOR REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT AR E AS FOLLOWS:- AS REQUESTED, THE REASONS FOR RE-OPENING THE C ASE ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- AN INFORMATION HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM THE IN VESTIGATION WING, NEW DELHI THROUGH ITO, WARD-32(2), NEW DELHI THAT MS JYOTSNA SUKUMAR, PROP., BUREAU OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE SERVICES (PAN AMHPS4797H) HAS TAKEN ACCOMMODATION ENTRY IN THE FORM OF UNSECURED LOAN AMOUNTING TO RS.5,25,000/- FROM FOLLOWING PARTIES D URING THE A.Y. 2006-07: I) VINEET BANSAL RS.1,25,000/- II) ANURAG BANSAL RS.2,00,000/- III) BANSAL INHOLD LTD. RS.2,00,000/- TOTAL RS.5,25,000/- THE INFORMATION SO RECEIVED HAS GONE THROUGH AND CONSIDERED BY ME. ACCORDINGLY, I HAVE REASON TO BE LIEVE THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS.5,25,000/- HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT DURING THE F.Y. 2005-2006 RELEVANT TO THE A.Y. 2006-2007 W ITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1 961. ITA NOS.4064 & 4065/DEL/2015 3 YOUR CASE IS FIXED FOR HEARING O 01.11.2012. YOURS FAITHFULLY, SD/- (S.P. BAXLA) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-32(4), NEW DELHI. 5. THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE CIT VS. G & G PHARMA INDIA LTD. IN ITA 545/2015 VIDE JUDGEMENT DATED 8.1 0.2015, HELD AS UNDER:- 12. IN THE PRESENT CASE, AFTER SETTING OUT FOUR EN TRIES, STATED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON A SINGLE DATE I.E. 10TH FEBRUARY 2003, FROM FOUR ENTITIES WHICH WERE TERMED AS ACCOM MODATION ENTRIES, WHICH INFORMATION WAS GIVEN TO HIM BY THE DIRECTORA TE OF INVESTIGATION, THE AO STATED: I HAVE ALSO PERUSED VARIOUS MATERIALS AND REPORT FROM INVESTIGATION WING AND ON THAT BASI S IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS INTRODUCED ITS OWN HTTP://WWW.ITATONLINE.ORG ITA NO. 545/2015 PAGE 7 O F 8 UNACCOUNTED MONEY IN ITS BANK ACCOUNT BY WAY OF ABOVE ACCOMMODA TION ENTRIES. THE ABOVE CONCLUSION IS UNHELPFUL IN UNDERSTANDING WHETHER THE AO APPLIED HIS MIND TO THE MATERIALS THAT HE TALKS ABO UT PARTICULARLY SINCE HE DID NOT DESCRIBE WHAT THOSE MATERIALS WERE. ONCE THE DATE ON WHICH THE SO CALLED ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES WERE PROVIDED I S KNOWN, IT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DIFFICULT FOR THE AO, IF HE HAD IN FA CT UNDERTAKEN THE EXERCISE, TO MAKE A REFERENCE TO THE MANNER IN WHIC H THOSE VERY ENTRIES WERE PROVIDED IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESS EE, WHICH MUST HAVE BEEN TENDERED ALONG WITH THE RETURN, WHICH WAS FILED ON 14TH NOVEMBER 2004 AND WAS PROCESSED UNDER SECTION 143(3 ) OF THE ACT. WITHOUT FORMING A PRIMA FACIE OPINION, ON THE BASIS OF SUCH MATERIAL, IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE FOR THE AO TO HAVE SIMPLY CONCL UDED: IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS INTRODUCED ITS OWN UN ACCOUNTED MONEY ITA NOS.4064 & 4065/DEL/2015 4 IN ITS BANK BY WAY OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. IN TH E CONSIDERED VIEW OF THE COURT, IN LIGHT OF THE LAW EXPLAINED WITH SU FFICIENT CLARITY BY THE SUPREME COURT IN THE DECISIONS DISCUSSED HEREINBEFO RE, THE BASIC REQUIREMENT THAT THE AO MUST APPLY HIS MIND TO THE MATERIALS IN ORDER TO HAVE REASONS TO BELIEVE THAT THE INCOME OF THE A SSESSEE ESCAPED ASSESSMENT IS MISSING IN THE PRESENT CASE. 6. SIMILAR IS THE POSITION OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIG H COURT IN THE CASE OF SIGNATURES HOTELS PVT. LTD. VS. ITO AND ANOTHER (2011) 338 ITR 51 (DEL), MADHU KHOSLA VS. CIT 368 ITR 165 (DEL) AND CIT VS. INSECTICIDES (INDIA) PVT. LTD., 357 ITR 330 (DEL). 7. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE PROPOSITIONS LAID DOW N IN ALL THESE CASES, I HOLD THAT THE REOPENING IN BOTH THESE ASSESSMENT YEARS ARE BAD IN LAW AS THERE IS NO APPLICATION OF MIND BY THE AO. 8. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30.10.201 5. SD/- [J.SUDHAKAR REDDY] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED, 30 TH OCTOBER, 2015. DK ITA NOS.4064 & 4065/DEL/2015 5 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT AR, ITAT, NEW DELHI.