ACIT, Circle 23, Kolkata, Kolkata V. Shri Rakesh Bhartia, Kolkata

ITA 428/KOL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5090 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 11 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 22-02-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 16-03-2012
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NILOY BARAN SOM JCITLD
• Assessee Lawyers: D S DAML E FCA LD
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Unexplained expenditure; Income from undisclosed sources; Salary income
• Section: 69C; 143(3); 68

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 428/KOL/2012- C-AM SRI RAKESH BHARTIA 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, C BENCH, K OLKATA BEFORE : SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER , AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 428/KOL/2012 A.Y 2008-09 ACIT, CIRCLE-23, KOLKATA VS. SRI RAKESH B HARTIA PAN: ADGPB 7715C (APPELLANT) (R ESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT/DEPARTMEN T: SHRI NILOY BARAN SOM, JCIT, LD.SR.DR FOR THE RESPONDENT/ASSESSEE: SH RI D.S. DAMLE, FCA, LD.AR DATE OF HEARING: 22-02-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 29 -02-20 16 ORDER SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE ARISES OUT OF THE OR DER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A)-XIV, KOLKATA IN APPEAL NO. 326/CIT(A)-XIV/08-09 DATED 27 -12-2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 AGAINST THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT FRAME D BY THE LD.AO U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS TH E ACT). 2. THE FIRST ISSUE TO BE DECIDED IN THIS APPEAL IS AS TO WHETHER AN ADDITION U/S. 69C OF THE ACT TOWARDS UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE AMOU NTING TO RS.6,00,000/- FOR HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES COULD BE MADE IN THE FACTS AND CIRCU MSTANCES OF THE CASE. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THIS ISSUE ARE THAT THE LD. AO FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE EVEN THOUGH HAD MADE WITHDRAWALS OF RS. 18,69,039/- FO R HIS PERSONAL EXPENSES HAD NOT CHOSEN TO MAKE ANY CASH WITHDRAWALS FOR MEETING HI S HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES. THE LD. AO ALSO FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD WITHDRAWN RS.5 0,000/- FROM HIS ANOTHER BANK ACCOUNT ( NO. 75952) WITH THE AXIS BANK, MUMBAI, WH ICH WAS LYING AS CLOSING CASH BALANCE AT THE END OF THE YEAR. IN THESE CIRCUMSTA NCES, HE CHOSE TO MAKE AN ADDITION ITA NO. 428/KOL/2012- C-AM SRI RAKESH BHARTIA 2 OF RS. 6 LAKHS TOWARDS UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE FO R MEETING THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES U/S.69C OF THE ACT. ON 1 ST APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMI SSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LD.AO ON THIS COUNT. AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US ON THE FOLLOWING GRO UND:- 1. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE T HE LD. CIT-(A) ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 6,00,000/- MADE BY A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE U/S. 69C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT THE ASSESSEE'S CASH WITHDRAWALS FROM THE EXPLAINED SOURCES WERE NE VER UTILIZED FOR EXPENSES AND IN FACT USED TO SHORE UP HIS EXPLA INED CAPITAL BY UTILYISING UNEXPLAINED CASH FOR HIS ACTUAL FAMILY E XPENSES. 4. THE LD.DR VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD.AO AND ARGUED THAT IT IS VERY UNLIKELY THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT INCURRED ANY EXP ENDITURE TOWARDS HIS PERSONAL EXPENSES. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD.AO WAS JUSTIFIED IN M AKING THE IMPUGNED ADDITION ON THIS ISSUE. IN RESPONSE TO THIS, THE LD.AR VEHEMEN TLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND ARGUED THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAD MADE DETA ILED OBSERVATION ABOUT THE TOTAL HEADS OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AND VARIOUS PERSON AL EXPENSES THAT HAVE BEEN INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE. THUS HE ARGUED THAT THERE IS NO NEED TO MAKE ANY ADDITION TOWARDS HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO T HE ADDITION, HE FURTHER ARGUED THAT THE LEARNED AO HAVING STATED THAT THE SOURCES FOR M EETING THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES WERE CASH WITHDRAWALS FROM THE AXIS BANK, MUMBAI, O UGHT NOT TO HAVE MADE ANY ADDITION AS UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE, AS ADMITTEDLY THE SOURCES OF WITHDRAWALS HAVE BEEN PROVED BY THE LD.AO HIMSELF. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD INCLUDING THE PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE ASSESS EE. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN TOTAL DRAWINGS OF RS.35,38,395/-, WHICH INCL UDED THE AMOUNTS INCURRED TOWARDS PERSONAL EXPENSES OF THE ASSESSEE. THIS IN CLUDES WITHDRAWALS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE BY CHEQUES FOR HIS PERSONAL EXPENSES TOWA RDS RENT PAID AMOUNTING TO RS.13,80,000/-FOR RESIDENTIAL ACCOMMODATION AND TE LEPHONE EXPENSES ETC. WE ALSO ITA NO. 428/KOL/2012- C-AM SRI RAKESH BHARTIA 3 FIND THAT SUM OF RS.2,82,728/- HAS BEEN TREATED A S PERQUISITE IN THE SALARY INCOME DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE LD .AO HAD ALSO STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE CASH WITHDRAWALS OF RS. 50,000/- P.M FROM THE AXIS BANK, MUMBAI AND THE SAME WERE LYING AS CLOSING CASH BALANCE, AMONG OTH ERS, WHICH OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN INCURRED TOWARDS HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES. THIS VERY FAC T EXPLAINS THE SOURCE FOR INCURRING HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURE, IF ANY, OVER AND ABOVE THE DRAWINGS AS REPORTED BY THE ASSESSEE (STATED SUPRA). HENCE, THERE CANNOT BE A NY ADDITION BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 69C OF THE ACT. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE LD.AO HAD NOT BROUGHT ANY MATERIAL/EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO PROVE THAT THE ASSE SSEE HAD PERSONAL EXPENSES OVER AND ABOVE THE DISCLOSED SUM OF RS.35,38,395/- TOWARDS D RAWINGS. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE LD.AO HAD ALSO NOT BROUGHT ANY MATERIAL/EVIDENCE TO PROVE THAT THE CASH WITHDRAWALS MADE FROM SAID AXIS BANK, MUMBAI HAVE BEEN SPENT E LSEWHERE BY THE ASSESSEE THEREBY THE SAID CASH IS NOT AVAILABLE TO REMAIN AS CLOSING CASH BALANCE. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) IN THIS REGARD. WE UPHOLD THE SAME. THE GROUND NO. 1 OF THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 6. THE LAST ISSUE TO BE DECIDED IN THIS APPEAL IS AS T O WHETHER A SUM OF RS.2,50,00,000/- RECEIVED AS LOAN BY THE ASSESSEE F ROM M/S. BRIGHT IMPEX AND AGENCIES (P) LTD COULD BE ADDED AS UNEXPLAINED CAS H CREDIT U/S. 68 OF THE ACT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 7. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THIS ISSUE ARE THAT THE ASSE SSEE WAS IN RECEIPT OF INTEREST FREE LOAN OF RS. 2.50 CRORES FROM M/S. BRIGHT IMPEX AND AGENCIES (P) LTD DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED TH E NAME, ADDRESS AND INCOME-TAX PARTICULARS OF THE SAID LOAN CREDITOR TOGETHER WIT H BALANCE SHEET AND RETURN ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS OF THE LOAN CREDITOR TO EXPLAIN TH E IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS BEFORE THE LD.AO. IT WAS FOUND THAT MONIES WERE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE BY A/C PAYEE CHEQUES. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FURNISHED THE BANK ITA NO. 428/KOL/2012- C-AM SRI RAKESH BHARTIA 4 STATEMENT OF THE LENDER TO PROVE THE IMMEDIATE SOU RCE OF CREDIT. THE LD.AO FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT DISCHARGED HIS ONUS IN TERMS OF SECTION 68 OF THE ACT BY PROVING THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION AND CREDITWORTHI NESS OF THE LENDER. THE LD.AO ALSO MADE VARIOUS OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THE FINANCIAL CAP ACITY OF THE LENDER IN HIS ORDER PASSED U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT. ON 1 ST APPEAL, THE LD.CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE DELETED THE IMPUGNED AD DITION ON THIS ISSUE. AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND:- 2. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT-(A) ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2, 50,00,000/- MADE BY A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S. 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THE CIT(A)'S ORDER IN TREATING THE L ENDER COMPANY AS A GENUINE LENDER AND THE LOAN TRANSACTION AS GEN UINE IS PERVERSE IN NATURE DUE TO THE FOLLOWING REASONS:- A) THE CIT(A) HAS RELIED UPON A PAID UP CAPITAL FIG URE OF RS.3,25,85,000/- WHICH WAS AFTER THE DATE ON WHICH THE LOAN WAS GIVEN AND NOT PRIOR TO IT. B) THE CIT(A) HAS ACCEPTED THE ALLEGED SHARE PREMIU M OF RS. 27 CRORES AS GENUINELY NET OWNED FUNDS OF THE LENDER C OMPANY, WHEN IN REALITY IT HAS NO WORTHWHILE BUSINESS AND ASSETS TO JUSTIFY SUCH PREMIUM IN ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. C) THE CIT(A) HAS RELIED UPON THE GROSS INCOME TO J USTIFY THE CREDIT WORTHINESS OF THE LENDER WHILE IN REALITY THE NET I NCOME OF THE LENDER WAS A LOSS OF RS.2,89,917/-. D) THE CIT(A) HAS TOTALLY OVERLOOKED THE MOST IMPOR TANT FACT THAT THE LENDER COMPANY DID NOT RECEIVE ANY INTEREST ON SUCH A HUGE LOAN AND NEITHER DID IT OFFER ANY REASONABLE EXPLAN ATION FOR NOT RECEIVING THE SAME. E) THE CIT(A) HAS IGNORED THE DEBITS AND CREDITS OF CRORES IN THE ACCOUNT OF THE LENDER COMPANY WHICH HAVE NO CONNECT ION WITH ANY BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS AND ARE PROOF OF ITS ACTUAL B USINESS OF PROVIDING HAWALA ENTRIES. ITA NO. 428/KOL/2012- C-AM SRI RAKESH BHARTIA 5 8. THE LD. DR VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD.AO IN MAKING ADDITION. IN RESPONSE TO THIS, THE LD.AR ARGUED THAT THE ENTIRE DETAILS ABOUT LOAN CREDITOR HAVE BEEN DULY FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD.AO. T HE SAID TRANSACTIONS WERE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE BY A/C PAYEE CHEQUES. THE SAID LOA NS WERE ALSO DULY REPRESENTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN MAY-JUNE 2009 BY A/C PAYEE CHEQUES. THE THREE ESSENTIAL INGREDIENTS OF SECTION 68 OF THE ACT NAMELY, IDENTITY OF THE C REDITOR, GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR HA VE BEEN DULY PROVED BY FILING/SUBMITTING NECESSARY EVIDENCES BY THE ASSESS EE, WHICH IS BEYOND DOUBT. THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO POINTED OUT TO THE FACTUAL ERRORS COMMITTED BY THE LD.AO BY MENTIONING THAT THE LENDER COMPANY HAS GO T PAID UP CAPITAL OF RS.25,00,000/- AS AGAINST THE ACTUAL PAID UP CAPITA L OF RS. 3,25,85,000/-. SIMILARLY, THE RESERVES AND SURPLUS OF LENDER COMPANY AS ON 31-03- 2008 WAS RS.26,87,67,396/- AS AGAINST FEW THOUSANDS ERRONEOUSLY MENTIONED BY THE LD. AO IN HIS ORDER. HE ALSO ARGUED THAT THE LENDER COMPANY IS A NON BANKING FI NANCIAL COMPANY (NBFC) DULY REGISTERED WITH THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA AND IS PR INCIPALLY ENGAGED IN GRANTING LOANS AND ADVANCES AND ALSO DERIVED INTEREST INCOME OF RS.1,70,95,047/- DURING THE YEAR IN WHICH THE LOAN WAS ADVANCED BY THEM TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, HE PRAYED BEFORE US FOR CONFIRMATION THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF TH E LD.CIT(A) IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO ON THIS COUNT. 9. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD INCLUDING THE DETAILED PAPER BOOK CONTAINING THE STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION OF TOTAL INCOME FOR THE AY 2008-09 & SALARY CERTIFICA TE TO THIS EFFECT IN PAGE 1-5 OF THE ASSESSEES PAPER BOOK, ASSESSEES PERSONAL BALANCE SHEET AS AT 31.03.2008, CAPITAL A/C & INCOME & EXPENDITURE A/C IN PAGE 6-8 OF THE PAPER BOOK, COPIES OF LOAN CONFIRMATION ISSUED BY M/S. BRIGHT IMPEX & AGENCIES PVT. LTD FOR THE FYS. 2007-08, 08-09 & 09-10 IN PAGES 13-15 OF THE PAPER BOOK, C OPY OF AUDITED ANNUAL FINANCIAL ACCOUNTS OF M/S. BRIGHT IMPEX & AGENCIES PVT. LTD FOR THE FY 2007-08 IN PAGES 16- 28 OF THE PAPER BOOK, COPY OF BANK STATEMENT IN RE SPECT OF CURRENT A/C NO.95111010006717 OF M/S. BRIGHT IMPEX & AGENCIES P VT. LTD IN PAGES 29-32 OF THE ITA NO. 428/KOL/2012- C-AM SRI RAKESH BHARTIA 6 ASSESSEES PAPER BOOK, PAN DETAILS OF M/S. BRIGHT IMPEX & AGENCIES PVT. LTD IN PAGE 33 OF THE ASSESSEES PAPER BOOK AND COPY OF L D.AOS REMAND REPORT IN PAGES 35-36 OF THE ASSESSEES PAPER BOOK. ON PERUSAL OF T HE AFORESAID PAPERS, WE FIND THAT THE LENDING COMPANY, M/S. BRIGHT IMPEX & AGENCIES P VT. LTD HAS GOT PAID UP CAPITAL OF RS.3,25,85,000/- AS ON 31-03-2008 AND RESERVES & SURPLUS OF RS.26,87,67,396/- AS ON 31-03-2008. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE SAID LENDIN G COMPANY, M/S. BRIGHT IMPEX & AGENCIES PVT. LTD IS A REGISTERED NON BANKING FINA NCIAL COMPANY (NBFC) ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF GRANTING OF LOANS AND ADVANCES A ND HAD INDEED DERIVED INTEREST INCOME OF RS.1,70,95,047/- FROM MONEY LENDING BUSI NESS DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2007-08. WE ALSO FIND FROM THE BANK STATEMENT OF LE NDING COMPANY I.E M/S. BRIGHT IMPEX & AGENCIES PVT. LTD, THAT THERE ARE SEVERA L HIGH VALUE TRANSACTIONS WITH DIFFERENT PERSONS THROUGH OUT THE YEAR. IT IS NOT T HE CASE OF THE LD.AO THAT THE CASH WAS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE LOAN CREDITOR IMMEDIATELY BEFORE ISSUING THE CHEQUES TO THE ASSESSEE. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE ENTI RE LOAN OF RS. 2.5 CRORES HAVE BEEN PAID BY THE LOAN CREDITOR BY 3 ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE S DRAWN ON SYNDICATE BANK, ESPLANADE BRANCH, KOLKATA. THESE FACTS HAVE BEEN CLEARED THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE ENTIRE LOAN HAS BE EN REPAID BY THE ASSESSEE IN MAY- JUNE 2009 BY ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES, WHICH WAS ALSO CONFIRMED BY THE LOAN CREDITOR. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN COMPLETED IN THIS CASE ON 27-12-2010, WHICH IS AFTER 18 MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF REPAYMENT OF THE LOAN BY THE ASSESSEE. ALL THESE FACTS PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION BE YOND DOUBT. WE FURTHER FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DULY FILED CONFIRMATION LETTERS FROM T HE LOAN CREDITOR BY DULY DISCLOSING ITS INCOME TAX PARTICULARS. WE FIND THAT THE LOAN T RANSACTION OF RS. 2.5 CRORES HAVE BEEN DULY REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE LOAN CR EDITOR, WHICH WERE ALSO PLACED BEFORE THE LD.AO. HOWEVER, THE LD.AO BASED ON CERTAIN FACT UAL ERRORS COMMITTED BY HIM WITH REGARD TO THE STATUS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE L OAN CREDITOR THAT IT IS ASSESSEES OWN MONEY, WHICH HAS BEEN LAUNDERED AND FOUND IT IS WAY BACK TO HIS OWN COFFERS IN THE GARB OF LOAN FROM M/S. BRIGHT IMPEX & AGENCIES PVT . LTD . FROM THE FACTS AND MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE ASS ESSEE HAS DULY PROVED HIS COMPLETE ITA NO. 428/KOL/2012- C-AM SRI RAKESH BHARTIA 7 ONUS WITH REGARD TO THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITOR, G ENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR AND HAD SATISFIED ALL THE THREE INGREDIENTS OF SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. WE FIND THAT THE LD.AO HAD NOT CHOSE N TO ISSUE SUMMON/NOTICE U/S. 133(6)/131 OF THE ACT TO VERIFY THE LOAN CREDITOR A ND ITS VERACITY TOGETHER WITH THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE LOAN CREDITOR. WE FIND THA T THE WILD ALLEGATION IS MADE BY THE LD.AO THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS LAUNDERED HIS UNACCOUNT ED MONEY/INCOME AND THE SAME IS BROUGHT BACK IN THE FORM OF LOAN. WE FIND FROM THE ENTRIES OF THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE LOAN CREDITOR THAT NO CASH WAS DEPOSITED IN THE AC COUNT OF THE LOAN CREDITOR IMMEDIATELY BEFORE ISSUING THE CHEQUES TO THE ASSES SEE. ON THE CONTRARY, THERE WERE OTHER HIGH VALUE TRANSACTIONS REFLECTED IN THE BAN K STATEMENT OF THE LOAN CREDITOR. HENCE, THE BASIC ALLEGATION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS LAUNDERED HIS UNACCOUNTED INCOME IS NOT PRIMA FACIE PROVED BY THE LD. AO EVEN DURING T HE REMAND PROCEEDINGS WHEN THE LD.AO GOT THE SECOND OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE NECESSARY VERIFICATION BY USING HIS STATUTORY POWERS VESTED ON HIM AND PROVIDED TO HIM IN THE STATUTE. WE FIND THAT THE FACTS OF THE CASE CLEARLY PROVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD COMPLETELY DISCHARGED HIS ONUS BY FILING ALL THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES IN SUPPORT OF THE LOAN TRANSACTION FROM M/S. BRIGHT IMPEX & AGENCIES PVT. LTD IN TERMS OF SECTIO N 68 OF THE ACT. HENCE, IT IS FULLY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COUR T IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. ORISSA CORPORATION REPORTED IN 159 ITR 78(SC). THE FACTS B EFORE THE HONBLE SC AND THE FACTS OF THE CASE BEFORE US ARE EXACTLY SIMILAR. HENCE, THE ADDITION MADE ON THIS COUNT U/S. 68 OF THE ACT BASED ON MERE SURMISES AND SUSPI CION IS HEREBY DELETED. THIS GROUND OF REVENUES APPEAL IS ALSO DISMISSED. 10. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED AS STATED ABOVE. THIS ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 29 -02- 2016 SD/- ( MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ) SD/- (M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) DATE: ITA NO. 428/KOL/2012- C-AM SRI RAKESH BHARTIA 8 1.. THE APPELLANT/DEPARTMENT: THE ACIT, CIR-23, 10 9 AJC BOSE ROAD, KOL-14. 2 THE RESPONDENT/ASSESSEE- SHRI RAKESH BHARTIA, CF- 172, SALT LAKE, KOL-64. 3 /THE CIT, 4.THE CIT(A ) 5. DR, KOLKATA BENCH 6. GUARD FILE. TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, ASSTT REGISTRAR **PRADIP SPS DATE 29 -02-2016 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:-