ACIT, New Delhi V. M/s Pole Star Securities Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4209/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7432 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-08-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 13-08-2014
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 03-08-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M B REDDY
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure; Depreciation; Income from undisclosed sources; Search and seizure
• Section: 69C; 40A(3); 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : F N EW DELHI BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI J.S. REDDY , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO S . 4204 , 4205 , 4206 , 4207 , 4208 & 4209 /DEL / 201 2 A.YS. 2003 - 04, 2004 - 05, 2005 - 06, 2006 - 07,2007 - 08 & 2008 - 09 ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 21, VS. M/S POLE STAR SECURITIES LTD. ROOM NO.344, E - 2, ARA CENTRE 185 , BLOCK B - 1, PASCHIM VIHAR JHANDEWALA EXT. NEW DELHI NEW DELHI - 55 C.O. NO S . 395 , 396 , 397 , 398 , 399 & 400 / DE L /201 2 (IN ITA NO S . 4204, 4205, 4206, 4207, 4208 & 4209 /DEL / 201 2 ) A.YS. 2003 - 04, 2004 - 05, 2005 - 06, 2006 - 07,2007 - 08 & 2008 - 09 M/S POLE STAR SECURITIES LTD. VS. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 21, 185, BLOCK B - 1, PASCHIM VIHAR ROOM NO.344, E - 2, ARA CENTRE NEW DELHI - 110063 JHANDEWALA EXT. NEW DELHI - 55 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI M.B. REDDY, CIT., D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE ORDER PER BENCH : 1. ALL THESE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAINS T THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - II, DELHI DATED 05.12.2011. THE CROSS OBJECTIONS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 2. AS THE ISSUES IN ALL THESE APPEALS ARE COMMON, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE THEY ARE DISPOSED OFF BY WAY OF THIS COMMON ORDER. ITA NOS. 4204 TO 4209/DEL/ 2012 C.O. NOS. 395 TO 400/DEL/2012 2 3. GROUNDS OF APPEAL READS AS UNDER: - 1. THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2890252 / - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 69C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN NOT CONFIRMING THE ASSESSING OFFICERS OBSERVATION THAT THE ENTIRE SALES OF THE ASSESSEE REPRESENTED ITS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. 3. THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 3,73,998 / - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY WAY OF DISALLOWANCE OF 100% DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE AND DEPRECIATION CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. THE FACTS RELATIN G TO THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BROUGHT OUT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN PARAS 8, 9 & 11 READS AS UNDER: - 8. I N THE CASE OF PRESENT ASSESSEE ALL THE PURCHASES & SALES ARE IN CASH. THE ITEMS PURCHASED & SOLD ARE TEXTILE & FABRIC. THE NAME AND STYLE OF THE TEXTIL ES & FABRICS ARE DENIM, FABRICS K - III SUPER FINE (N), FABRIC (PS), FABRIC (PS) EMBROIDERY, FABRIC (PS) EXCEL, FABRICS, KASHMIRI FABRICS - I, KASHMIRI FABRICS - I(D) ETC. FROM THESE ITEMS IT CAN BE SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT DE A LING IN BRANDED ITEMS. THERE IS NO NAME OF ANY COMPANY IN THESE PRODUCTS. SHAWLS ARE PURCHASED AND SOLD IN PIECES AND REST OTHER ITEMS ARE SOLD IN METERS. IT IS FURTHER SEEN THAT THE PURCHASES & SALES ARE WITHIN M/S THAPER HOMES GROUP OF CASES. IN INVENTORIES OF FABRIC & TEXTILE GOOD S SHOWN IN THE BALANCE SHEET THE CLOSING STOCK OF LAST YEAR, STANDS AT RS. 10,04,02,514 / - . THIS YEAR THE FIGURE IS RS. 10,02,05,207 / - WHICH US ALMOST THE SAME. THEREFORE, PURCHASES & SALES ARE ONLY OUT OF CURRENT YEAR TRANSACTIONS WHICH ARE HELD UNVERIFIAB LE AND BOGUS. IT IS HIGHLY IMPROBABLE THAT WITH A HUGE STOCK INVENTORY OF GOODS WHICH CHANGE IN FASHION AND TASTE THE ASSESSEE HAS TO MAKE SALES FROM FRESH PURCHASES ONLY. THE PREPONDERANCE OF PROBABILITY SUGGESTS THAT THE STOCKS ARE NOT GENUINE BUT SINCE THESE ARE DECLARED PRIOR TO 1.4.02, NO ACTION IS BEING TAKEN FOR NOW. 9. . KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE, IT IS CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT ALL CASH PURCHASES ARE UNVERIFIABLE AND HENCE A ITA NOS. 4204 TO 4209/DEL/ 2012 C.O. NOS. 395 TO 400/DEL/2012 3 SUM OF RS. 28,90,252 / - IS DISALLOWED. (THE O PENING STOCK IS OF THE PERIOD BEFORE THE BLOCK PERIOD OF SECTION 153C). PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(C) ARE BEING INITIATED FOR FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. SINCE, THE ENTIRE CASH PURCHASES OF RS. 28,90 , 252 / - ARE BOGUS AND ARE BROUGHT TO TA X AS UNACCOUNTED EXPENDITURE U/S 69C OF THE IT ACT, NO FURTHER ADDITION IS MADE /S 40A(3) OF THE IT ACT SINCE THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF CASH PURCHASES IS BROUGHT TO TAX. 1 1 . SIMILARLY, THE EXPENSES CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IN P&L A/C ARE ALSO UNVERIFIAB LE AS SUCH 100% OF THE EXPENSES ARE DISALLOWED. 5. BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ON JURISDICTION AS WELL AS ON MERITS. ON THE ISSUE OF JURISDICTION, I.E. REGARDING THE VALIDITY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 153C R.W.S.143(3), THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. ON MERITS, HE DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED THE REVENUE HAS FILED THESE APPEALS. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE CROSS OBJE CTIONS ON THE ISSUE OF JURISDICTION, ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 153C R.W.S. 143(3) IS A LEGAL, BAD IN LAW, WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND THAT IT IS TIME BARRED. 6. WE HAVE HEARD SHRI M.B. REDDY, LD. CIT., D.R. ON BEHALF OF REV ENUE AND SHRI KAPIL GOEL LD. COUNSEL ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. 7. ON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, PERUSAL OF THE PAPERS ON RECORD AND THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, WE H O LD AS FOLLOWS: - ITA NOS. 4204 TO 4209/DEL/ 2012 C.O. NOS. 395 TO 400/DEL/2012 4 (I) ON GROUNDS NO. 1 & 2 , THE ISSUE IS ADMITTEDLY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE BY VARIOUS DECISIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL. 8. THE ITAT, C BENCH IN ITA NO S . 4147/DEL/2012 TO 4152/DEL/2012, A.YS. 2003 - 04 TO 2008 - 09 AND CO NOS. 355 - 360/DEL/2012 IN THE CASE O F GLORIOUS CLUB PVT. LTD. ORDER DATED 28.03.2014 AS PARAS 9 TO 13 ONWARDS HELD AS UNDER : - 9. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE RECORDS AND THE CASE LAWS CITED BY BOTH THE PARTIES. WE FIND THAT SIMILAR ISSUE WHICH WQS DECIDED BY THE SA ME ASSESSING OFFICER AND ID CIT(A) STEMMING OUT OF THE SAME SEARCH AND SEIZURE PROCEEDINGS HAD COME UP BEFORE 'A' BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 21 VS. BLUE LUXURY INDEX PVT. LTD. IN ITA NOS. 5495 - 5500/DEL/2011 WITH CO. NOS. 31 - 36/DEL/2011 ORDER DATED 13.06.2012. BOTH PARTIES AGREE THAT THE FINDING OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. BLUE LUXURY INDEX PVT. LTD. (SUPRA) COVER THE ISSUE IN HAND. 10. THE TRIBUNAL AT PARA 6 TO PARA 8 OF THE ORDER IN ITA NO. 5495 - 5500/DEI/2011 HA S HELD AS FOLLOWS: - '6. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DR AND HAVE GONE THROUGH THE FACTS OF THE CASE. INDISPUTABLY & AS POINTED OUT BY THE ID C I T(A), THE ENTIRE PURCHASES ADDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ARE ACCOUNTED FOR THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSING OF FICER, WITHOUT REJECTING THE BOOKS RESULTS ADDED THE ENTIRE PURCHASES, SOURCE OF WHICH, ACCORDING TO THE LEARNED C I T{A) , WAS DULY EXPLAINED. LIKEWISE, THE LEARNED C I T{A) FOUND THAT SALES HAD BEEN MADE BY ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES AND DULY REFLECTED IN STOCK R EGISTERS AND SUPPORTED BY SALE AND PURCHASE VOUCHERS. THE ID C I T{A) ITA NO. 5495 - 5500/DEI/2011 & CO NOS. 31 TO 36/DE1/2011 ALSO FOUND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN HIS REMAND REPORT DID NOT COMMENT ADVERSELY ON THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF PURCHASES AND SALES. ACCORDINGLY, THE ID C I T{A) DELETED THE AFORESAID ADDITIONS IN THESE SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS. WHILE INTERPRETING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 69C OF THE ACT, HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN RADHIKA CREATION (SUPRA) HELD THAT THE FOCUS O F SECTION 69C ITA NOS. 4204 TO 4209/DEL/ 2012 C.O. NOS. 395 TO 400/DEL/2012 5 IS ON THE 'SOURCE' OF SUCH EXPENDITURE AND NOT ON THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE EXPENDITURE ITSELF. IN THAT CASE ALSO IT WAS AN ADMITTED POSITION THAT THE EXPENDITURE WAS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND IT WAS BECAUSE OF THIS REASON THAT THE ITAT OBSERVED AS UNDER: - 'AS THE EXPENDITURE WAS ACCOUNTED IN THE REGULAR BOOKS, THE SOURCE IS OBVIOUSLY EXPLAINED. THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 69C ARE NOT APPLICABLE AS THERE AS NO UNACCOUNTED EXPENDITURE. (EMPHASIS SUPPLIED)' 6.1 HON 'BLE HIGH COURT, ACCORDINGLY, HELD THAT SECTION 69C REFERS TO THE 'SOURCE OF THE EXPENDITURE AND NOT TO BE EXPENDITURE ITSELF. CONSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS CLEARLY WRONG IN TREATING THE SAID EXPENDITURE AS UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE UNDER SECTION 69C OF THE SAID ACT AND THE LOWER APPELLATE AUTHORITIES WERE RIGHT IN THEIR CONCLUSIONS IN DELETING THE SAID ADDITIONS, HON'BLE COURT CONCLUDED. 6.2 IN THE INSTANT CASE BEFORE US, INDISPUTABLY, THE PURCHASES AND SALES ARE ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS OF A CCOUNTS. THUS, SOURCE OF THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED IN: PURCHASES IS OBVIOUSLY EXPLAINED. IN THE LIGHT OF THE VIEW TAKEN IN THEIR AFORESAID DECISION BY THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE REVENUE DID! NOT PLACE ANY MATERIAL BEFORE US, CONTROVERTING THE AFORESAID FINDINGS OF FACTS RECORDED BY THE ID CIT{A) SO AS TO ENABLE US TO TAKE A DIFFERENT VIEW IN THE MATTER, WE HAVE NO BASIS TO INTERFERE. IN VIEW THEREOF, GROUND NOS. 1 & 2 IN THE APPEAL ORE DISMISSED. 7. 7. AS REGARDS DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES IN THESE SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS, THE ID. C I T(A) FOUND THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002 - 03, NO DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES WAS MADE WHILE THE ASSESSING OFFICER, IN THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION, DID NOT POINT OUT ANY IT EM OF EXPENDITURE, WARRANTING DISALLOWANCE. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, AND IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY BASIS, WHEN THE REVENUE DID NOT EVEN IDENTIFY ANY SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF EXPENDITURE, WHICH WAS NOT RELATED TO THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO IN TERFERE. THEREFORE, GROUND NO.3 IN THESE APPEALS IS ALSO DISMISSED. 8. IN VIEW OF OUR AFORESAID FINDINGS, REJECTING THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THEIR COS BECOME PURELY ACADEMIC AND THEREFORE, DO NOT SURVIVE FOR OUR AD JUDICATION.' 11. THIS DECISION WAS FOLLOWED BY THE ITAT IN THE CASE OF ANUPMA LINKS PVT. LTD. IN ITA NO.4135 - 4140/DEL/2011 ORDER DATED 12.10.2012 AS WELL AS IN THE CASE OF AA TESTRONICS SOLUTIONS IN ITA NO. 4233 - 4228/DEI/2010 ORDER DATED 20.10.2012 AND WA S FOLLOWED ITA NOS. 4204 TO 4209/DEL/ 2012 C.O. NOS. 395 TO 400/DEL/2012 6 BY THE ITAT DELHI BENCH IN ITA NOS. 1068 - 1073/DEI/2012 AND CO NOS. 173 - 178/DEI/2012 BY ORDER DATED 31.10.2012. HENCE ON MERIT THE ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. 12. THE IT AT IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS. AA TESTRONICS SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD , CITED HAS HELD AS UNDER: - '8. HAVING CONSIDERED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ID DR, IT IS SEEN THAT THE MATTER IS INDEED COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY 'ANUPAMA LINKS PVT. LTD' (SUPRA). THE FIRS T AND FOREMOST, THE SEARCH IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THE SAME AS THAT IN 'ANUPAMA LINKS PVT. LTD. '. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE TWO CASES IS ALSO THE SAME. THE TRADE OF BOTH THE ASSESSEE IS ONE AND THE SAME I.E., TRADE OF TEXTILES. THEN, IN BOTH CAS ES, BOOKS AND STOCK REGISTER WERE FILED AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT REJECT THE SAME. THE ID CLT(A) HAS, AS NOTED HEREINABOVE, TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT THE FACT THAT ALL THE SALES MADE BY THE ASSESSEE STOOD RECORDED IN THE ASSESSEE'S BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, WHICH INCLUDED THE SALES AND PURCHASE VOUCHERS AND STOCK REGISTERS MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE ON A DAY - TO - DAY BASIS. THESE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WERE DULY PRODUCED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER EXAMINED THEM, ON EXAMINATION, NO NEGATIVE OBSE RVATION THEREAGAINST WAS RECORDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. COMPLETE NAMES AND ADDRESS OF THE PARTIES TO WHOM THE GOODS WERE SOLD WERE AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER. MOST OF THE CUSTOMERS WERE ASSESSED TO INCOME - TAX. SALES WERE MADE AGAINST THE OPEN ING STOCK. THE PURCHASES MADE DURING THE YEAR AND THE SALES WERE BUT CONVERSION OF STOCK. THE PROFIT THEREFROM HAD ALREADY BEEN TAXED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT BRING ANYTHING ON RECORD TO INDICATE THAT THE SALE PROCEEDS REPRESENTED THE ASSESSEE'S INCO ME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. THE SALE TRANSACTIONS WITH MIS. MICRON TEXTILES WERE NOT CONFIRMED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON A TEST CHECK BASIS. NO MORE INQUIRIES WERE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THEREAFTER. THE ASSESSEE'S BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WERE AUDITED BO OKS OF ACCOUNT. THE TAX AUDIT REPORT WAS ON RECORD. THE AUDITORS HAD NOT MADE ANY NEGATIVE OBSERVATIONS THEREIN. ALL THESE FACTS WERE DULY TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION BY THE ID CIT(A) AND IT WAS THEREUPON THAT THE ISSUE WAS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. 9. SO FAR AS IT REGARDS 'ANUPAMA LINKS PVT. LTD.' (SUPRA), UNDER ITA NOS. 4204 TO 4209/DEL/ 2012 C.O. NOS. 395 TO 400/DEL/2012 7 SIMILAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, THE TRIBUNAL FOLLOWING 'CIT VS. MIS. RADHIKO CREATION', A JUDGMENT DATED 30.04.2010, RENDERED BY THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT. HELD THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 69C OF THE ACT TO BE NOT APPLICABLE. FURTHER, THE MATTER IS ALSO COVERED BY 'BANULAL C BORANA', 282 ITR 251 (BOM), WHICH IS ON SIMILAR LINES. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY ERROR IN THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE ID CIT(A) AND R ACCORDINGLY, THE SAME ARE CONFIRMED. THE GRIEVANCE RAISED BY THE DEPARTMENT BY WAY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL TAKEN IS, THEREFORE, REJECTED.' 13. SINCE THE FACTS INVOLVED ARE SIMILAR, AND SINCE REVENUE DID NOT PLACE ANY MATERIAL BEFORE US TO CONTROVERT THE FINDING OF THE FACTS RECORDED BY THE LD CIT(A), SO AS TO ENABLE US TO TAKE A DIFFERENT VIEW IN THE MATTER, WE HAVE NO BASIS TO INTERFERE WITH THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE ID CIT(A), THEREFORE RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AND ALSO THE DE CISIONS OF CO - ORDINATE BENCH, WE DISMISS THE REVENUE'S APPEAL BOTH THE GROUNDS AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE ID CIT(A). 9. CONSISTENT WITH THE VIEW TAKEN THEREIN WE UPHOLD THE FINDINGS OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY THAT THE ADDITION IN QUESTION WAS WRO NGLY MADE UNDER SECTION 69C OF THE ACT AS THE EXPENDITURE WAS ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND HENCE THE SOURCE IS OBVIOUSLY EXPLAINED. 10. IN THE RESULT, WE UPHOLD THIS FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE ON TH ESE ISSUE. 11. GROUNDS NO. 3 & 4 ARE AGAINST 100% DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE AND DEPRECIATION CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. ADMITTEDLY, THIS ISSUE IS ALSO COVERED BY THE ORDERS OF THE ITAT ON THE SAME FACTS IN VARIOUS CASES. ITA NOS. 4204 TO 4209/DEL/ 2012 C.O. NOS. 395 TO 400/DEL/2012 8 12. THE ITAT, DELHI C BENCH IN I TA NOS. 1068 - 1073/DEL/2012 JUDGMENT DATED 31.10.2012 HAD FOLLOWED THE COORDINATE BENCH ORDER IN THE CASE OF ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE - 21 VS. BLUE LUXURY INDEX PVT. LTD. IN ITA NOS. 5495 - 5500/DEL/2011 AND CO NOS. 31 - 36/DEL/2011 ORDER DATED 13.06.2012 AND HAD UPHE LD THE ORDER OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. 12.1 THE TRIBUNAL AT PAGE 6 OF THE ORDER HAD HELD AS FOLLOWS: - 7. AS REGARDS DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES IN THESE SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS, THE LD. CIT(A) FOUND THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEE FOR AY 2002 - 0 3, NO DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES WAS MADE WHILE THE AO, IN THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION, DID NOT POINT OUT ANY ITEM OF EXPENDITURE, WARRANTING DISALLOWANCE. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, AND IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY BASIS, WHEN THE REVENUE DID NOT EVEN IDENTITY ANY SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF EXPENDITURE, WHICH WAS NOT RELATED TO THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO INTERFERE. THEREFORE, GROUND NO.3 IN THESE APPEALS IS ALSO DISMISSED. 8. IN VIEW OF OUR AFORESAID FINDINGS, REJECTING THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THEIR COS BECOME PURELY ACADEMIC AND THEREFORE, DO NOT SURVIVE FOR OUR ADJUDICATION. 7. THIS DECISION WAS FOLLOWED BY THE ITAT IN THE CASE OF ANUPMA LINKS PVT. LTD. IN ITA NOS. 4135 - 4140/DEL/2011 ORDER DATED 12.10.20 12 AS WELL AS IN THE CASE OF AA TESTRONICS SOLUTIONS IN ITA NOS. 4233 - 4228/DEL/2010 ORDER DATED 20.10.2012. HENCE, ON MERITS THE ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. 8. CONSISTENT WITH THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE DECISION, WE UPHOLD THE ORDERS OF COMMISS IONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND DISMISS THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE. 13. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE COORDINATE BENCH ON THIS ISSUE, THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ITA NOS. 4204 TO 4209/DEL/ 2012 C.O. NOS. 395 TO 400/DEL/2012 9 14. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 15. AS ALREADY STATED IN THE CROSS OBJECTIONS THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RAISED LEGAL ISSUES. 16. AS WE HAVE UPHELD THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS, WE DO NOT DEEM IT NECESSARY TO ADJUDICATE THE GROUNDS OF CROSS OBJECTIONS AS IT WOULD BE AN ACADEMIC EXERCISE. HENCE, THESE GROUNDS ARE DISPOSED OF AS SUCH. 17. IN THE RESULT, ALL HE APPEALS AND C.OS ARE DISMISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26 .0 8 .2014 SD/ - SD/ - ( DIVA SINGH ) ( J.S. REDDY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED 26 .0 8 .2014 A KS* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT (APPEALS) CONCERNED 4. CIT CONCERNED 5. D.R., ITAT, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR