ITO, New Delhi V. Mrs. Manju Devi, New Delhi

ITA 4499/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7600 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 7 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 19-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 07-10-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P DAM KANUNJNA SENIOR
• Assessee Lawyers: DR ANTHWAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 142(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH E : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.4499/DEL./2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) ITO, WARD 47 (1), VS. MRS. MANJU DEVI, NEW DELHI. 478, BABA FARIDPURI, WEST PATEL NAGAR, NEW DELHI 110 008. (PAN : AGKPD1150A) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI D.R. ANTHWAL, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : SHRI P. DAM KANUNJNA, SENIOR DR DATE OF HEARING : 19.05.2016 DATE OF ORDER : 26.05.2016 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : APPELLANT, INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 47 (1), NEW DE LHI (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE REVENUE), BY FILI NG THE PRESENT APPEAL SOUGHT TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 21.07.2011 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)- XXX, NEW DELHI QUA THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 ON THE GROUND S INTER ALIA THAT :- ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ITA NO.4499/DEL./2011 2 (I) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS 34,76,500/- RIGHTL Y MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF DEPOSIT MADE IN BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE BY CASH AND CHEQUES WHEN TH E ESSENTIAL INGREDIENTS IN THE CASE OF UNSECURED LOAN S I.E. IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THE L OAN GIVERS COULD NOT BE ESTABLISHED. (II) IGNORING THE FACTS THAT (A) THE LOAN CONFIRMA TION LETTERS DOES NOT BEAR ANY DATE, (B) THE LANGUAGE OF THE CON FIRMATION LETTER IS SAME AND EVEN THE HAND WRITING IN SOME OF THE LETTERS, PRODUCED DURING APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, FROM DIFFERE NT LOAN GIVERS ARE SAME, (C) AS PER ASSESSMENT ORDER PARA 2 , THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE ON 23-10-2009 SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSES SEE HAD NEITHER OBTAINED ANY LOAN NOR REPAID DURING THE YEA R, (D) AS PER THE SAME PARA ABOVE, THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT L OANS WERE RAISED FROM RELATIVES AND HER VILLAGERS FOR THE TRE ATMENT OF HER MOTHER IN LAW WHO WAS SUFFERING FROM PILES & HEART AILMENT AND IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE STAT ED THAT HER MOTHER IN LAW SUFFERED FROM CANCER, (E) THE CASH FL OW PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY EV IDENCE. (III) NOT CONSIDERING THAT IN VIEW OF VAGUE AND ST EREOTYPED CONFIRMATIONS FROM THE SAID LOAN GIVERS AND IN VIEW OF FACTS MENTIONED IN PARA (II) ABOVE, THE ASSESSEE HAS ONLY MADE ATTEMPTS TO COVER UP THE CASH AND CHEQUE DEPOSITS B Y MAKING A CONCOCTED STORY OF RAISING LOANS FOR THE TREATMEN T OF HER MOTHER IN LAW. THE APPELLANT CRAVES THE RIGHT TO ALTER, AMEND, ADD OR SUBSTITUTE THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 2. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE : DURIN G THE SCRUTINY PROCEEDINGS, INFORMATION UNDER AIR WAS RECEIVED REG ARDING THE DEPOSIT OF CASH AMOUNTING TO RS.27,96,500/- ON VARI OUS DATES IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE MAINTAINED WITH STANDA RD CHARTERED BANK DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2006-07. IN RESPONS E TO THE NOTICES UNDER SECTION 143(2) AND 142(1) OF THE INCOME-TAX A CT, 1961 ITA NO.4499/DEL./2011 3 (HEREINAFTER THE ACT), SHRI SUNIL PUROHIT APPEARE D AND PLEADED IN WRITING IN REPLY TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE DATED 31.08.2 009 THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NEITHER OBTAINED ANY LOANS NOR PAID DU RING THE YEAR, BUT ASSESSEE FILED UNDATED CONFIRMATION FROM 24 PER SONS VIDE COVERING LETTER DATED 29.11.2009 BY CONCOCTING A ST ORY THAT LOANS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN CASH AND CASH ENTRIES IN THE BA NK ACCOUNT IS A COVER UP. THE ASSESSEE STATED TO HAVE RAISED LOANS OF RS.27,96,500/- PURPORTEDLY FOR SMALL OPERATION AND ILLNESS BUT HAVING NO CAPACITY TO RETURN THE LOAN FROM HER INCO ME FROM THE SALARY FROM A PRIVATE DENTAL LABORATORY. NECESSARY DETAILS WERE CALLED FOR 14.12.2009 VIZ. DETAILS OF THE TREATMENT OF MOTHER-IN-LAW WITH EXPENSES MADE THEREOF, COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT OF LENDERS WHOSE AFFIDAVITS HAVE BEEN FILED, AFFIDAVITS AND CO PY OF BANK ACCOUNT OF ITR OF THE REMAINING PERSONS, DETAILS OF PROPERTY PURCHASED BY ASSESSEE, IF ANY, ETC. BUT NONE APPEA RED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON 14.12.2009 AND ON THE BASIS OF MATE RIAL ON RECORD, AO COMPUTED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS.39,17, 940/- FOR THE YEAR UNDER ASSESSMENT. 3. ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT ( A) WHO HAS PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL BY DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.25,96,500/- OF CASH AMOUNT AND RS.8,80,000/- OF CHEQUE AMOUNTS. FEELING ITA NO.4499/DEL./2011 4 AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE HAS COME UP IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY WAY OF FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES TO THE APPEAL, GONE THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS R ELIED UPON AND ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN T HE LIGHT OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 5. LD. DR CHALLENGING THE IMPUGNED ORDER CONTENDED INTER ALIA THAT DESPITE FAILURE OF THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE SOURC E OF AMOUNT OF RS.34,76,500/-, CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE A DDITION; THAT THERE ARE NUMEROUS DISCREPANCIES IN THE CONFIRMATIO NS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF WHICH ADDITION HAS BEEN DE LETED; THAT ASSESSEE BEING A SALARIED PERSON WORKING IN A PRIVA TE DENTAL LABORATORY CANNOT BE EXPECTED TO RETURN THE HUGE LO AN WHICH IS UNDISCLOSED INCOME. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE RELIED UPON THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT (A) AND FUR THER CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS A SALARIED PERSON AND WAS HAV ING RENTAL INCOME; THAT THE ENTIRE BORROWED AMOUNT IN QUESTION HAS BEEN SPENT BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE TREATMENT OF CANCER OF HER M OTHER-IN-LAW; THAT DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE LD. CIT (A) HAS CALLED THE REMAND REPORT WHICH HAS EXPLAINED THE SOURCE AND GE NUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. ITA NO.4499/DEL./2011 5 6. UNDISPUTEDLY, THERE ARE CASH DEPOSIT ENTRY TO TH E TUNE OF RS.14,37,000/-, CHEQUE DEPOSIT ENTRY OF RS.8,80,000 /- (OUT OF WHICH ENTRY OF TWO CHEQUES OF RS.1,00,000/- EACH ARE RETU RNED CHEQUES) IN THE ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEE DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2 006-07 MAINTAINED WITH STANDARD CHARTERED BANK. ASSESSEE STATED TO HAVE BORROWED THE AMOUNT IN QUESTION FROM HER RELATIVES AND FRIENDS FOR TREATMENT OF HER MOTHER-IN-LAW, WHO WAS SUFFERING F ROM CANCER, IN SATYAM HOSPITAL, EXHIBITION ROAD, PUNE. 7. LD. CIT (A) CALLED THE REMAND REPORT QUA THE SUB MISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDIN GS. THE AO VIDE LETTER DATED 03.05.2011 SUBMITTED THE REMAND R EPORT WHICH IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER FOR READY REFERENCE :- NOTICE U/S 133 ( 6) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT HAS BEEN ISSUED TO ALL THE 15 CREDITORS. THE REPLY IN THIS REGARD HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM ALL THE CREDITORS CONFIRMING THE LOAN HAS BEEN GIVEN IN CASH OUT OF AGRICULTURE INCOME AND HAS BEEN RECEIVED BACK FROM SMT MANJU DEVI AND FURTHER STATED THAT LOAN HAS BEEN GIVEN FO R TREATMENT OF ASSESSEE'S MOTHER-IN-LAW. THE DETAILS OF THE SAME A RE GIVEN BELOW:- S.NO. NAME & ADDRESS OF THE LOAN GIVER AMOUNT WITH DATE AMOUNT / RECEIVED BACK DATE 1. VAIJDEV CHOUDHARY, VILLAGE AND POST - MANHAR DISTT- VAISHALI, BIHAR 45000/- 17.10.2006 35000/- 19.10.2006 80000 / 6.11.2006 2. KAILASH CHOUDHARY, VILLAGE AND POST - MANHAR DISTT- VAISHALI, BIHAR 45000/- 17.10.2006 45000/- 6.11.2006 3. DEVIKANT MANDAI, VILLAGE AND POST BADHARA, DISTT SUPOL, BIHAR 45000/ - 17.10.2006 45000/ - 6.11.2006 ITA NO.4499/DEL./2011 6 4. KALICHARAN MANDAL, VILLAGE AND POST - BADHARA, DISTT SUPOL, BIHAR 50000/ - 17.10.2006 50000/ - 18.11.2006 5. RAJANDEV MANDAL, VILLAGE AND POST - BADHARA, DISTT SUPOL, BIHAR 45000/- 13.10.2006 45000/- 13.11.2006 6. JHONA MANDAL, VILLAGE AND POST - BADHARA, DISTT SUPOL, BIHAR 65000/- 17.10.2006 65000/- 6.11.2006 7. BASHIST KUMAR, VILLAGE AND POST - BADHARA, DISTT SUPOL, BIHAR 45000/- 16.10.2006 45000/- 18.11.2006 8. RAJESH GUPTA, VILLAGE AND POST - BADHARA, DISTT SUPOL, BIHAR 50000/- 17.10.2006 45000/- 07.11.2006 45000/- 6.11.2006 45000/- 7.11.2006 9. VED KUMAR, VILLAGE AND POST - BADHARA, DISTT SUPOL, BIHAR 45000/ - 16.10.2006 45000/- 19.10.2006 45000/ - 6.11.2006 45000/- 7.11.2006 10. BIRENDRA GUPTA, VILLAGE AND POST - BADHARA, DISTT SUPOL, BIHAR 45000/- 17.10.2006 45000/- 18.11.2006 11. BHOLA PRASAD, VILLAGE AND POST - BADHARA, DISTT SUPOL, BIHAR 45000/ - 17.10.2006 40000/- 19.10.2006 85000/ - 18.11.2006 12. BHARAT MANDAL, VILLAGE AND POST - BADHARA, DISTT SUPOL, BIHAR 48000/ - 6.11.2006 45000/ - 16.11.2006 13. SURENDRA MANDAL, VILLAGE AND POST - BADHARA, DISTT SUPOL, BIHAR 47000/ - 17.10.2006 47000/ - 18.11.2006 14. DASHRATH PRASAD, VILLAGE AND POST - BADHARA, DISTT SUPOL, BIHAR 35000/- 16.10.2006 40000/- 17.10.2006 75000/- 6.11.2006 15. RAJIV MANDAL, VILLAGE AND POST - BADHARA, DISTT SUPOL, BIHAR 45000/- 17.10.2006 45000/- 6.11.2006 ITA NO.4499/DEL./2011 7 THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS GIVEN THE NAMES AND ADDRE SS OF 15 LOAN GIVERS WHO HAVE CONFIRMED THE FACT THAT LOAN WAS GI VEN BY THEM AND THAT THEY HAVE RECEIVED BACK THE AMOUNT GIVEN B Y THEM. OUT OF TOTAL CASH DEPOSITED BY THE ASSESSEE IN HER BANK ACCOUNT OF RS.27,96,500/- THE SOURCE IS AS GIVEN HERE UNDER:- RS.13, 18,000/- OUT OF CASH WITHDRAWN BY THE ASSESS EE FROM HER BANK ACCOUNT FOR WHICH THE DETAIL OF CASH IN THE SH APE OF CASH TRANSACTION HAS BEEN PRODUCED BEFORE ME. THE DETAIL OF CASH AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF DE POSIT IN BANK IS AS UNDER :- RS. 16,000/- OPENING BALANCE RS. 1,54,200/- RENT RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD RS. 1,30,000/- SALARY RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE RS.12,08,000/- OUT OF CASH WITHDRAWAL FROM BANK WHI CH WAS RE-DEPOSITED IN THE BANK RS. 14,73,000/- HELP/LOAN FROM RELATIVES AND FRIEN DS FOR WHICH NECESSARY CONFIRMATIONS HAVE BEEN FILED THE FUND FLOW OF CASH SHOWN BY THE A SE SEE IS AS U NDER :- I. CASH DEPOSIT UPTO 19.10.2006 IN THE BANK RS.2875500 DEPOSITED ON 28.3.2007 RS. 11000 2796500 II. CASH WITHDRAWAL UPTO 19.10.2008 RS.1208000 OPENING CASH RS. 16000 OUT OF CURRENT INCOME, SALARY AND RENT RS. 94000 1318000 LOAN FROM RELATIVES AND FRIENDS IN CASH 1473000 2791000 LESS: CASH DEPOSIT UPTO 19.10.2006 INTO BANK 27850 00 6000 ADD: CASH WITHDRAWN ON 12.12.2006 27000 33000 LESS: CASH DEPOSIT INTO BANK ON 28.3.2007 110 00 AMOUNT UTILIZED FOR HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES 22000 THAT AS REGARDS THE ADDITION OF RS.8,80,000/- BEING THE CHEQUE DEPOSITED IN THE BANK BY THE ASSESSEE, IT IS STATED THAT OUT OF CHEQUE DEPOSITED TWO CHEQUES AMOUNTING OF RS.1.00 LACS EAC H ON 3/7/20006 AND 8/8/2006 ARE THE RETURNED CHEQUE AND IT IS EVIDENT FROM THE BANK STATEMENT WHEREAS THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER ALSO CONSIDERED THESE TWO CHEQUES BEING DEPOSITED IN THE BANK. THE ITA NO.4499/DEL./2011 8 BANK STATEMENT SHOWING THE RETURN OF THESE CHEQUES HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO ME. THUS, THE DEPOSIT IN BANK IS NOT RS.8,80,000/- BUT IS RS.6,80,000/- AND ARE RECEIVED FROM THE FOLLOWING PERSONS BY CHEQ UES AS LOAN FOR TREATMENT OF MOTHER-IN-LAW: RS.2,50,000/- BY CHEQUE NO. 679866, DATED 2.4.2006 FROM SANJAY JAIN RS.60,000/- BY CHEQUE NO.075827, DATED 2.7.2006 FR OM MR. JITENDRA SEHGAL RS.2,50,000/- VIDE CHEQUE NO.679867, DATED 2.4.200 6 FROM MR. SANJAY JAIN RS.L,20,000/- VIDE CHEQUE NO.556575, DATED 7.6.2006 FROM MR. KULDEEP MANDAL ----------------- RS.6,80,000/- AND THE LOAN TAKEN HAS ALSO BEEN REFU NDED DURING THE PERIOD AND THE DETAIL OF THE SAME HAS BEEN SHOWN. THE CONFIRMATIONS FROM THE CREDITORS WHO HELPED THE ASSESSEE AND GAVE THE AMOUNT FOR TREATMENT OF HER MOTHER-IN-LAW BY CHEQUES WERE SUBMITTED DURING THE COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS AND PHOTO COPIES OF THE SAME WERE SUBMITTED TO ME WHICH HAVE BEEN EX AMINED. 8. DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, ASSESSEE ALSO BROUGHT ON RECORD COPIES OF ESTIMATE GIVEN BY THE SATYAM HOSPI TAL, EXHIBITION ROAD, PUNE FOR THE TREATMENT OF SMT. KUSHMA DEVI IN TWO PARTS AND ALSO GIVEN THE ROUGH IDEA ABOUT THE EXPENSES. 9. FROM THE PERUSAL OF REMAND REPORT DATED 03.05.20 11 FILED BY THE AO AND CASH FLOW STATEMENT, IT IS PROVED THAT L D. CIT (A) HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS :- (I) THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DULY PROVED DURING THE RE MAND PROCEEDINGS THAT RS.14,73,000/- WAS BORROWED BY HER AS LOAN FROM RELATIVES AND FRIENDS, WHICH HAVE ITA NO.4499/DEL./2011 9 UNDISPUTEDLY BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE LENDERS AND REMAINING AMOUNT OF RS.13,23,500/- WAS ALREADY LYIN G IN THE BANK ACCOUNT BEING THE SALARY RECEIVED BY TH E ASSESSEE, RENT RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD UNDER ASSESSMENT AND OUT OF CASH WITHDRAWN FROM THE BANK WHICH WAS RE-DEPOSITED IN THE BANK; (II) THAT 15 LENDERS WHO HAVE LENT THE LOAN IN CASH TO THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR UNDER ASSESSMENT HAVE MADE THE CONFIRMATION IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE U/S 133( 6) THAT THEY HAD LENT THE LOAN WHICH HAS BEEN REPAID B ACK TO THEM; (III) THAT DURING THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS, THE AO HA S SCANNED THE ENTIRE TRANSACTIONS AS TO THE AVAILABIL ITY OF THE FUNDS AMOUNT OF RS.1,31,000/- BEING HER SALARY AMOUNT; RS.1,54,200/- RECEIVED AS RENT; RS.12,08,00 0/- BEING THE AMOUNT RE-DEPOSITED OUT OF CASH WITHDRAWA L FROM BANK; AND RS.14,73,000/- BEING THE LOAN AVAILE D FROM RELATIVES AND FRIENDS WITH THE ASSESSEE IN HER BANK ACCOUNT, THE DETAIL OF WHICH IS GIVEN AT PARA 6OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT (A) WHICH IS OTHERWISE FACTUALLY UNDISPUTED; ITA NO.4499/DEL./2011 10 (IV) THAT DURING THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSES SEE HAS DULY PROVED THE FUND FLOW OF THE CASH AMOUNT IN QUESTION HAVING BEEN DEPOSITED DURING THE PERIOD 19.10.2006 AND 28.03.2007; (V) THAT SO FAR AS ADDITION OF RS.8,80,000/- ON ACC OUNT OF CHEQUE DEPOSITED IN THE BANK BY THE ASSESSEE IS CONCERNED, TWO CHEQUES AMOUNTING TO RS.1,00,000/- EACH DATED 03.07.2006 AND 08.08.2006 ARE RETURNED CHEQUE, WHICH FACT IS PROVED FORM THE BANK STATEMEN T BUT THE AO HAS CONSIDERED BOTH THE CHEQUES HAVING BEEN DEPOSITED IN THE BANK, SO THE TOTAL AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN THE BANK BY THE ASSESSEE BY WAY OF CHEQUE WAS RS.6,80,000/- AND NOT RS.8,80,000/-; (VI) THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS.6,80,000/- RECEIVED BY T HE ASSESSEE BY WAY OF CHEQUE AS FRIENDLY LOAN HAS BEEN DULY CONFIRMED BY THE LENDERS WHOSE CREDITWORTHINES S AND GENUINENESS HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED BY THE REVENU E DEPARTMENT. MOREOVER, THE LENDERS HAVE ALREADY STATED THAT THE SAID LOANS AMOUNT HAVE ALREADY BEEN REPAID TO THEM; (VII) THAT FROM THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT , IT IS PRO VED THAT OUT OF CASH DEPOSITED OF RS.27,96,500/-, THE AMOUNT OF ITA NO.4499/DEL./2011 11 RS.14,73,000/- WAS PART OF THE CASH AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE WHICH STOOD ALREADY PROVED AND REMAINING AMOUNT IS PROVED TO BE OUT OF THE LOAN AVAILED OF B Y THE ASSESSEE; (VIII) THAT SINCE THE AO HAS MADE EX-PARTE ASSESSME NT WHEN NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON 14.12.2009, AS RECORDED AT PAGE 3 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, ALL FINDINGS RETURNED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE T HAT GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION REMAINED UNESTABLISH ED ARE NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE EYES OF LAW; (IX) THAT THE FINDINGS OF THE AO THAT ASSESSEE HAS CONCOCTED THE STORY OF AILMENT OF HER MOTHER-IN-LAW ARE APPARENTLY BASED UPON CONJECTURES AND SURMISES AS ASSESSEE WAS NOT ALLOWED TO PROVIDE DOCUMENTS DURIN G ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING; (X) THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN PROVIDED WITH ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BY THE LD. CIT (A) DURING APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BY CALLING THE REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO, THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITORS; ITA NO.4499/DEL./2011 12 (XI) THAT AO RECORDED IN PARA 2 OF THE ASSESSMENT O RDER THAT LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED IN WRITING DA TED 23.10.2009 IN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE DATED 31.08.2009 THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NEITHER OBTAINED A NY LOAN NOR REPAID DURING THE YEAR UNDER ASSESSMENT, CANNOT BE TAKEN AS A GOSPEL TRUTH AND ASSESSMENT CANNOT BE BASED ON THE SAME WHICH MAY BE DUE TO NEGLIGENCE OR INADVERTENCE ON THE PART OF THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE, PARTICULARLY IN THE FACE OF THE FACT THAT DURING REMAND PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HAS DULY PROVED THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR AS REQUIRED UNDER THE LAW. 10. IN VIEW OF WHAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED ABOVE, WE FI ND NO MERIT IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE, HENCE, THE SAME IS HEREBY DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 26 TH DAY OF MAY, 2016. SD/- SD/- (N.K. SAINI) (KULDIP SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED THE 26 TH DAY OF MAY, 2016 TS ITA NO.4499/DEL./2011 13 3COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT-XXXIII, NEW DELHI. 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.